Here's the deal
Stress was laid upon "liberté." Take note of the emphasis placed upon "égalité".
Big question outstanding is whether "fraternité" can be preserved.
Within the UK coalition government, that is. Today David Cameron, Nick Clegg and colleagues set out the details of their deal.
They are, it seems, united in tackling the deficit, primarily through spending cuts rather than tax increases. For the avoidance of doubt, Vince Cable said he fully backed the chancellor.
But how about the French motto?
It fell to the support acts to spell out the underlying principles. Home Secretary Theresa May talked of restoring liberties. Mr Cable spoke of a commitment to egalitarian fairness: although it was equality of opportunity, not outcome.
And fraternity? As the two sides contentedly coalesced, I found it striking that the prime minister felt the need to stress, at length and in detail, the Tory content of this coalition package.
Reforming government
He felt the need to stress, further, how much more could be done in implementing elements of the Conservative manifesto by a coalition government with a secure majority.
Members of the wicked media at the launch suggested that the two leaders, Cameron and Clegg, now appeared to feel more at ease in each other's company than in the society of their individual parties.
Not at all, replied the PM. He had not started by favouring a coalition but he now believed that it had "the potential to be a great reforming government."
Again, though, he listed the upside for Tories. Strong and stable government, action on the deficit, scrapping the planned hike in NI, action to counter the "dependency culture" of welfare, wholesale education reform (in England).
Plainly, he was protesting rather loudly in the face of discernible grumbling on his back benches.
For Scotland? Umpteen relevant elements - including, of course, those changes to benefits rules.
Plus the expected indication that the money demanded by Alex Salmond from the fossil fuel levy will be forthcoming - although it is only under review at this stage.
Public finances
Plus, on the constitution, a promise to implement Calman and a commission to look at the West Lothian Question in the Commons.
On funding for the devolved institutions, there is a nod towards the "concerns" raised by the Holtham Commission - which dealt with the situation in Wales where the Barnett formula has become an object of loathing.
However, it notes further that any change to the system "must await the stabilisation of the public finances".
In other words, it is too painful to contemplate deficit reduction and scrapping Barnett at the same time.
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~41~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
“Liberte, egalite, fraternite” the French Revolutionary cry as the peasantry took control of their political future.
Maybe a good refrain for the SNP in asserting the right of Scots to their own political independence.
Complain about this comment
From last thread...
111. 0xdeadbeef
Very funny :-)
The new 'new' buildings are looking fab in my opinion. On malls, we don't tend to pooh-pooh the big glossy malls in Kuwait for example. They might, but we don't ;-)
Like you, I suspect, I appreciate some style in our modern stuff. I think lately they've done it.
Complain about this comment
from last thread...
109. Anagach
Do you think that the term 'indiginous population' is incorrect ?.
Or do you think that the term 'indiginous population' has negative
connotations in common usage that make it a liability in public
relations ?
Yes. I would use 'population'.
Otherwise I agree entirely with your stance regarding our separate legal and educational and religious systems. As it's all part of the reasons why we, most of us, refer to ourselves as Scottish.
Complain about this comment
finally it appears that the UK and Scottish governemnts can deal with each other. Such a refreshing change from the last 10 years, where we either had a totally subservient scottish government or a government in the UK that would not talk to the scottish one.
I do not want the tax powers in Calman implemented as they are deeply flawed, and hope that there will be either a referendum on devo max, independance et al. or that fidscal autonomy is given the nod. Only once we have fiscal autonomy, will the books be open enough to make the case to persuade people for independance on economic grounds.
John
Complain about this comment
BBC Scotland newsreaders must really hate the thought of broadcasting a significant SNP success over Westminster.
How will they twist the news to say it means nothing at all?
Complain about this comment
Shock Horror! Could it be that all the labour/snp fans that were predicting a horrendous catalogue of anti-scottish cuts could be wrong.
Is the new Con/LibDem coalition actually following up on its promises and trying to do whats best for the country as a whole?
I'm pleased that coalition is starting so well.
Complain about this comment
I stopped writing my response to 96. on the previous threat to watch FMQ, only to have it closed to comments.
Having never been North of Perth there are many issues in Scotland you will have no idea about at all.
I think that would be true even if I'd been everywhere from Sark to Shetland I'd daresay there are issues in West Dunbartonshire and Glasgow that I have no idea about.
Your point re-centralisation would logically extend to the scrapping of councils altogether.
Only if councils intend to hive all the services they provide off to private firms.
This SNP Government has removed all local accountability for revenue raising and now provides in effect all council funding. So do you really want to see a super council in Edinburgh or Glasgow?
Westminster has removed all national accountability for revenue raising and now provides in effect all devolved funding. I do not want to see a super council in London.
What you highlight is the central belt mentality where they dictate to the rest of Scotland with no knowledge of the issues. Pretty much like Westminster don't you think? Perhaps the irony is lost on you?
On the contrary, I never actually said whether I thought there should be a national police service or whether the local authorities should have responsibilty for policing.I haven't said that the central belt should be making decisions for the rest of Scotland or vice-versa, what I have said is that he who pays the piper calls the tune, and if local councils are providing police services then those councils should debate their priorities, if funding is to come from Holyrood then Holyrood should call the shots.
This is purely in a sense of funding priorities, I'm not suggesting that a policeman on the street have his own operational discretion removed.
Complain about this comment
Is anyone else surprised at how much more willing the Tories have shown they are to talk to the Scottish gov't and parliament than the UK Labour gov't was? Is it just talk to make Scotland dislike the Tories a bit less?
I hope it isn't and they deliver on their promises.
eye_write could you elaborate on what you mean about our "religious systems." Do you mean presbyterianism or are you referring to the fact that Scotland has a higher proportion of Catholics than England or both?
Complain about this comment
The ironies just keep coming. Nick Clegg insists on using English constitutional language. He doesn't know his British constitutional history. This reform is, apparently, the greatest since "The Great Reform Act" of 1832. That is an Anglo-centric view of British history. He should have said since the Reform Acts of 1832. We had our own very separate Reform Act in 1832 - thanks to Jeffry and Cockburn of Edinburgh street name fame.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Reform_Act_1832
So did the Irish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Reform_Act_1832
"Reform Acts" is to speak the language of the British, not English, constitution, but I guess Clegg just forgot about Scotland. Or was he making it easier for the English to swallow?
An irony indeed. Especially when we consider that it was the Scots who inflicted this Liberal moment on England. Without Scotland's rejection of the Tories, England and the rest of the UK would have a majority Conservative government. Without the Scots MPs, there would be NO hung parliament and NO coalition.
Election result (minus Scotland):
Tories 306
Labour 217, Lib Dems 46 & Others 22 (Total 285)
So what are we going to get for creating this reforming moment? Sweeties?
Complain about this comment
I don't want Calman either. However I think that if they are implemented, the tax plans are so badly thought out that no Scottish Government could work with them for long. Imagine having to justify an increased tax-take going to London.
Further change would have to follow.
Complain about this comment
for the flaws here is a good start
Complain about this comment
Brian,
Regarding the proposed changes to the use of lottery funding, I would like to see a major part of the Lottery fund diverted to making our streets look better - councils could set up 'gardening competitions' and 'clean street' - 'best kept street' - 'most improved street' competitions.
Schools could be given funding, (to be used for school trips etc.), to encourage children to take part in cleaning up the environment - our local schoolchildren here already take part in beach cleaning operations and this could be extended to the streets.
Local youth clubs could get cash for facilities, if members take part.
This would perhaps help engender some pride in areas where this is lacking. Obviously the more deprived areas would need most of the money, but even some of the more prospeous areas would benefit from a facelift; the elderly, in particular, would benefit if local youth assisted with their gardening or and it might help forge a bond between the young and the not so young.
I see no reason why this could not be extended to include some exterior painting and minor repairs to items such as fencing, provided the requirements of the health & safety police can be satisfied.
This would distribute the lottery funds for the benefit of all not just the few as at present.
Complain about this comment
5. At 12:32pm on 20 May 2010, minuend wrote:
BBC Scotland newsreaders must really hate the thought of broadcasting a significant SNP success over Westminster.
How will they twist the news to say it means nothing at all?
I am sure they'll think of something. ;)
Complain about this comment
"Plus the expected indication that the money demanded by Alex Salmond from the fossil fuel levy will be forthcoming - although it is only under review at this stage."
This seems considerably more vague than was previously suggested. It now looks like Cameron has given himself an escape route lest the notion of giving Scotland her own money proves too unpopular in England.
Complain about this comment
3. eye_write
"109. Anagach
Do you think that the term 'indiginous population' is incorrect ?.
"
Yes. The word is "indigenous".
Complain about this comment
"Plainly, he [Cameron] was protesting rather loudly in the face of discernible grumbling on his back benches."
Is this the reef upon which the ramshackle ship of coalition will founder?
Complain about this comment
6. DrK
"Could it be that all the labour/snp fans that were predicting a horrendous catalogue of anti-scottish cuts could be wrong."
It could be that they could be. Or could it be that it could be too early to tell?
Complain about this comment
109. Anagach
Do you think that the term 'indiginous population' is incorrect ?.
Yes, becaused it's spelled wrongly. The word is "indigenous". But that's by the by. More seriously, in 21st century European politics "indigenous population" is most commonly used as far right wing code for "white people". In the political campaign for Scottish self-determination, "indigenous population" is a stupid, wrong-headed and deeply unhelpful turn of phrase.
The only sensible use of the term "indigenous population" refers to modern people who descend from the very first human beings to set foot on the land. In Europe the indigenous population was the Neanderthals, but they're extinct - apart from those who went on to become Scottish Labour MPs.
Complain about this comment
Why is my comment at #1 STILL awaiting Moderation?
In response to Brian's invokation of the French revolutionary cry in relation to the Coalition presentation I wrote:
______________________
“Liberte, egalite, fraternite” the French Revolutionary cry as the peasantry took control of their political future.
Maybe a good refrain for the SNP in asserting the right of Scots to their own political independence.
______________________
What is the issue with that?
And my comment on the last blog: pointing out to Jamieson that it is entirely inappropriate to label the SNP "Xenophobic" when they are the only major party in Scotland that embraces immigration is also still awaiting moderation. I went on to point out that the first Muslim (born in Pakistan) elected as an MSP represented Glasgow for......the SNP.
Complain about this comment
'action to counter the "dependency culture" of welfare'
That will be labours scare ploy in the ghettos at the next election.
'Vote tory and you will be given a job'
Panic and fear throughout the Gulags.
Complain about this comment
It will turn out to be the same old crap nicely packaged until you cut the ribbon.
They obviously take the Great British Public for a nation of mugs.
The only mugs in this deal are the LibDems just wait till the gloves come off never mind the wrapping.
Complain about this comment
5. At 12:32pm on 20 May 2010, minuend wrote:
BBC Scotland newsreaders must really hate the thought of broadcasting a significant SNP success over Westminster.
How is Westminster and holyrood talking and agreeing things a "a significant SNP success over Westminster"? Its not like he's painted himself blue and wrestled the money out of Cameron's hands all the while crying "freedom!"
Surely this is a success for a sensible new government that's doing the best for the whole country in collaboration with the devolved regions?
Complain about this comment
Aye Brian, not one but 9, or is it 10/11/12 reviews to paper over the ConDems cracks.
Wonder how the wallpapering lasts when the ‘fit starts hitting the shan’.
Complain about this comment
6. At 12:54pm on 20 May 2010, DrK wrote:
I agree, but it is not in the best interests of certain people to quietly let the coalition get on with what it promised. This new politics is very hard for some to swallow. The tories/lib/dems seem to have put nation before parties and if they succeed, wow, this would be a problematic situation for the other parties. We certainly live in strange times. Who would have thought the tories and lib-dems would be able to work together. I am willing to look, listen and learn. For the nations sake and not any political motive, I hope this coalition works.
Complain about this comment
16. Electric Hermit
""Plainly, he [Cameron] was protesting rather loudly in the face of discernible grumbling on his back benches."
Is this the reef upon which the ramshackle ship of coalition will founder?"
Highly possible. There seem to be a lot of unhappy backbenchers.
Complain about this comment
22. DrK
"How is Westminster and holyrood talking and agreeing things a "a significant SNP success over Westminster"? Its not like he's painted himself blue and wrestled the money out of Cameron's hands all the while crying "freedom!""
Haha! He gets what he has been demanding for Scotland for years but of course it isn't a success.
Unionists at their best.
Complain about this comment
A stranger to this country might have expected that the Labour party, in its previous Scottish-led guise, would have been pro-Scotland in matters such as the renewables levy money (which, don't forget, is actually Scottish money, raised in Scotland). But remember, to Labour, renewables are apparently an enemy to be opposed.
Labour's determined resistance to the development of renewable energy in Scotland was more understable when it was the party of coal miners, but their perverse love affair with nuclear power has always been harder to grasp. Is it because they don't like the idea of Scotland producing a surplus of energy from naturally occuring resources (oh no, Scotland rich, strong and free, we can't have that?). Is it because the nuclear industry has co-opted them onto their gravy train? (See Brian Wison, Gordon Brown's brother Andrew and others for details) Or is it because of some peculiar influence of East Lothian and Torness power station on the Labour party in general?
I really don't know what it is, but I know it is something altogether strange.
Complain about this comment
#22
Oh, thanks for that, DrK. Scotland is a region now, is it?
You (and all others) really, really need to let go of that bad twenty-year-old film. Surely there must be another store of imagery that you can plunder without having to keep going back there again and again and again.
Complain about this comment
19. impeachblair
"And my comment on the last blog: pointing out to Jamieson that it is entirely inappropriate to label the SNP "Xenophobic" when they are the only major party in Scotland that embraces immigration is also still awaiting moderation. I went on to point out that the first Muslim (born in Pakistan) elected as an MSP represented Glasgow for......the SNP."
That is very true and shows the real nature of Scottish nationalism. It doesn't change the fact that there is an indigenous population in Scotland. It just happens that the indigenous population welcomes incomers--who don't become indigenous but DO become Scots.
Complain about this comment
Do you think that the Scottish Government will put a halt to HIPS to bring parity with their suspension in England & Wales?
Complain about this comment
If the ship sinks then it will be Labour's fault and there's alone;
They were the only party not willing to form a Progressive Rainbow alliance to keep the Tories out, so they handed power to the Tories. They are therefore traitors to not only those who voted for them, but everyone who voted for a progressive party - by far most of Scotland and the UK, including the numerous nationalists on this blog.
Complain about this comment
God save Ireland!
Complain about this comment
UPDATE: "BBC Scotland newsreaders must really hate the thought of broadcasting a significant SNP success over Westminster.
How will they twist the news to say it means nothing at all?"
Simples - BBC Scotland has dropped the story.
Complain about this comment
Vince Cable said he fully backed the chancellor.
Just as well George Osborne isn't a football manager, or he would know that he should be clearing his desk - if, that was, Vince Cable had any power or influence whatever.
Seems some LibDems haven't quite gotten used to Cabinet collective responsibility; whether he likes it or not, Vince Cable will be just as responsible for the decisions of the treasury as Messrs Osborne, Laws, et al.
Complain about this comment
The "dependency culture of welfare"?
In other words, that the state will take care of those in need, according to their needs, for as long as the needs presist.
As the excellent "Why Didn't Scots Vote Tory?" highlighted, we are by nature a more caring nation looking out for those less able to look after themselves, rather than the usual Tory "I'm alright, Jack!"
For all his claims to be a new kind of Conservative, Call Me Dave and his cronies still don't get it.
Complain about this comment
So,the contents of the Scottish Fossil Fuel levy account is to be returned to, believe it or not, Scotland.
The Labour party should hold their head in shame !
Complain about this comment
24. Ron McArthur
"This new politics is very hard for some to swallow."
Not all of us are credulous enough to believe that this is "new politics" rather than the same old same old with a bit of a hair-do.
Complain about this comment
25. GrannieAnne
"There seem to be a lot of unhappy backbenchers."
And none of the Tweedles dare complain. After all, how can it be "new politics" without power being returned to back-benchers.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
It's hard to work out what exactly makes someone indigenous if, going back far enough, we all originally came out of Africa.
I came across something recently that claimed if you lived in the southwest of Scotland and had one of the common local names, your ancestors had probably lived in the same area for the last five thousand years or so. I've no doubt that something similar applies to other areas of the country - my father could only trace our family tree back a few hundred years but it certainly looks like "we" have, mostly, been in the same part of Ayrshire at least as long as that and, I would guess, much much longer.
Which is what amuses me about the BNP - and there's not much about the BNP I find remotely amusing. Shouldn't they be in favour of sending the damned Angles and Saxons back where they came from too? They've only been here for a little over a thousand years, that's nothing...
I also spent a lot of time reading about British history as far back as I could go - mostly the post-Roman/Dark Age period - and got the impression that the Anglo-Saxon colonisation mostly displaced only some of the population in the East and South - not really having a huge effect on Wales or most of Scotland, and not even on all of England.
But, even before that, there was never a indigenous, homologous "British race" any more than there is now - there may be more genetic diversity now than there was thousands of years ago but, I suspect, not a lot.
In one way, it's nice to know that the first Muslim to be elected as an MSP was an SNP candidate who had been born in Pakistan. But it would be much nicer if nobody cared about that at all...
Complain about this comment
Perfection Personified
"As the excellent "Why Didn't Scots Vote Tory?" highlighted, we are by nature a more caring nation looking out for those less able to look after themselves, rather than the usual Tory "I'm alright, Jack!"
For all his claims to be a new kind of Conservative, Call Me Dave and his cronies still don't get it."
You're quite right too.
It was also interesting that, as "Why Didn't Scots Vote Tory?" pointed out, in the 1950s Scotland loved the Tories - then called 'the Scottish Unionist Party' - the only party to ever get the support of over half the electorate, but this dominance ended when they changed their name to 'the Scottish conservative and unionist party'.
This shows that the word 'conservative' must be one of the reasons for so many people hating the Tories so much.
Complain about this comment
Don't you think it's strange that the Labour party in Scotland used to claim they were the party which had Scotland's interests at heart, when you consider that the consevative led gov't is willing to contemplate giving Scotland the funds from the Scottish fossil fuel levy so soon, while in all their years of power Labour always refused to even discuss it.
"The Labour party should hold their head in shame !"
Wansanshoo I couldn't agree more.
Complain about this comment
#41 Jamieson
They didn't change their name, they got taken over. It was a union. Oh, the irony.
Complain about this comment
"There is an exact parallel between them and the situation between England and Scotland. Invasion, suppression, colonisation, steal natural resources, exploit the indigenous population."
'Invasion and supression' by an English King.
‘Exploitation’ of the Union by an English parliament.
'Exploitation' of Scottish resources. North Sea oil, Scottish coastal waters and control of Scottish fishing.
‘Exploitation’ of Scots by using them to fight others' wars (still it goes on).
‘Exploitation’ by closing down Scotland's industry to protect England's economy:
Closing down the coal industry, thus weakening Scotland's economy and destroying jobs.
Moving steel manufacture south of the border and closing down Scotland's steel production (more Scottish jobs gone).
'Exploitation' of Scotland by an anti-Scottish, English Broadcasting Corporation:
Withholding Scotland's share of licence fee funding and failing to support an indigenous TV industry whilst making TV programmes about Scotland which are populated with presenters and production teams from south of the border. Resistance to showing any kind of Scottish human content whilst exploiting Scotland's history, natural history and scenery. In many programmes filmed in Scotland never a Scottish accent is heard. Countryfile, which sometimes has Scottish content, has English presenters. Castle in the Country, about a Scottish Castle has English presenters. The programme about St Kilda's history had three TV presenters and a production team from London (the boatman I believe was Scottish, but he wasn't consulted, and was only seen in silhouette).
In a recent Time Team programme, a ships’ Doctor in Nelson's time, James Lind was mentioned. He recognized the root cause of scurvy and tried to improve the health of sailors in other ways. He was a Scot but that wasn't mentioned. Nelson’s navy was an all-English cast, (wasn't it?).
The Antiques Road Show where English craft skills are promoted incessantly (English craft skills were mainly imported from the continent anyway so it's a mute point). Scottish craft skills are quietly ignored.
Then there is the stereotyping of Scots as uncouth troublemakers and not capable of doing anything decent or intellectually challenging.
Worthy Scots are Brits, but worthy Englishmen are English.
Some time ago STV made a programme about the number of Scottish institutions which were run by the English (is this colonisation?). To have such a situation undermines Scottish traditions and culture. From memory STV were stamped on because it wasn't p.c. to mention such things, but it did generate much interest at the time. What would the situation be like now?
I suspect that many different countries would be relaxed about this type of situation because they have control of their own destiny, they have their own government and would make their own appointments, whether from within or outside the country. Scotland’s destiny, unfortunately, is in the hands of others. Perhaps Scots too could be relaxed about it if we had self government.
Would the French allow its institutions to be run by anyone except the French?
Nationalism is about self-pride, pride in country and improving living conditions for its citizens. Perhaps a measure of whether a population is indigenous is if they could sign up to these ideals.
Complain about this comment
The Cameron / Clegg relationship is already begining to look like the Owen / Steel relationship. A complete take over by one and humiliation of another. A few editions of Private Eye will highlight the comedic value of this "Odd Couple".
Seems Clegg is like Tony Blair, a tory at heart.
C McK
Complain about this comment
The use of French is not very appropriate, considering the state of the Euro currency at present. I'd like to see all the pro-Euro supporters stand up and give a good reason why we should be in it now.
On "British" or "Scottish". It is no one else's business but their own what an individual decides to class themselves as. And going back once again into history does not achieve anything. Who really cares what the true definition of "British" is? Why is anyone really that bothered? People can class themselves as martians, but I don't give a hoot.
37. Electric Hermit:
The Tory/Lib pact gives Scotland what we have been asking for, but you still complain. What will you do if Cameron actually turns out to be beneficial for Scotland, even if independence is not on the cards?
I know we are only two weeks into the new government, but give them a chance. We know cuts are still to come, but Cameron and Salmond are already working well together.
Complain about this comment
42. jamieson
"the consevative led gov't is willing to contemplate giving Scotland the funds from the Scottish fossil fuel levy so soon"
A little bit less partisan wording would have helped!
Yes, the coalition is Conservative led. No, the Tories had no plans to return the fossil fuel levy, while the LDs had that in their manifesto.
There is no evidence thus far that the Tories are any more positive towards Scotland than Labour were. Credit where credit is due, the LDs may have ensured that Scotland gets a better deal than we would have had with a majority Tory Government.
The arithmetic probably means something. 19.3% of the LD MPs come from Scotland. 0.3% of Tory MPs do.
Complain about this comment
46. enneffess
"The Tory/Lib pact gives Scotland what we have been asking for, but you still complain."
Not yet it hasn't.
Two words which should give anyone pause before putting their trust in Cameron. Tony Blair!
Complain about this comment
44. hamish42
I thought about dealing with what you think are points which support your obsession that "the English" exploit us - but they are simply evidence that you are obsessed by your own myths.
Just in case you ever come close to reality - a couple of points to consider.
It's the "British" Broadcasting Corporation. That should give you a clue. They are run by the Brits based in London.
Thatcher closed lots of mines in the North of England as well. Was that because they were using very long tunnels to steal the coal from beneath Scottish land?
btw did you write the wiki article on Lind? I only ask because it says "James Lind was a pioneer of naval hygiene in the Scottish and Royal navies."
We agree that Scotland would be better, were it independent. Why do you need to confuse the real issues with blaming all of those south of the border?
Complain about this comment
"48. At 9:21pm on 20 May 2010, Electric Hermit wrote:
Two words which should give anyone pause before putting their trust in Cameron. Tony Blair!"
What are you going on about now? Who would you rather have, Norman Tebbit?
Political leaders all need to be shiny now. Better go and buff up Salmond.
Complain about this comment
#49 Oldnat
I realise that you want to avoid blaming the English for anything to give your independence argument some respectability and to give some comfort to your own conscience. Your argument is - 'it's not the English I am against. They are nice people. We don't want to upset them. It's these dastardly people in the British institutions in London who are at fault'. I hear this all the time in these comments, 'we don't blame the English', but who runs these institutions. Who was it who suppressed the McCrone report for 30 years? Have you read the antagonistic and ill informed comments towards Scots in the media blogs?
Either you are pretty naive if you think we are not exploited or you want to present some other face which is false.
The Lind comment. No I did't write the Wiki article. So what! The fact was supressed by the Beeb which was my point. Just one among many.
Complain about this comment
50. enneffess
"What are you going on about now? Who would you rather have, Norman Tebbit?"
Not sure how you got to this little bit of silliness from anything I said. You are apparently ready to put your trust in Cameron. I am not so easily taken in.
Complain about this comment
8. jamieson
"eye_write could you elaborate on what you mean about our "religious systems.""
Yes. I just meant that in Scotland the church and state are separate. We have a secular society. There are many CoE lords in the House of Lords though.
And further back, around the time of the Act of Union, the church system in Scotland was a major factor in much of the disagreement at the time. So it was considered very important. Someone more willing, than me tonight, to recant this history may perhaps fill you in. Otherwise there are many books etc. on those interesting times (I had to read much of it at least twice! Then I find organised religion quite an alien concept ;-).
Complain about this comment
53. eye_write
I think I meant CoE Bishops in the House of Lords - or whatever they are!
(Don't say 'holy willies', eye_write, don't say it... :-P)
Complain about this comment
51. hamish42
But Hamish my friend, that some of these Brits were/are English, is no scale to measure all English folk by! Lest we Scots all be labelled sabateurs of the English economy, based on what Gordon Brown did. If they're a Brit, they're a Brit, they don't consider themselves to be English or Scottish anyway, that would be quite beneath them.
Complain about this comment
52. Electric Hermit
"I am not so easily taken in."
Yet you'll slag anyone who is similarly cynical about Scots nats or independence supporters, if you will.
Complain about this comment
50. enneffess
"Better go and buff up Salmond."
LOL. In the 'Salond'?
Complain about this comment
First Ministers Questions:
Newsnet Scotland
Complain about this comment
51. hamish42
"who runs these institutions."
That's the critical point.
Mostly they are run by those who are politically British (I stress politically, because accidents of place of birth, upbringing etc are irrelevant). You choose to judge on such incidentals. In consequence, you categorise all those who live within the borders of England as "the problem".
If you thought about it, you would realise that as well as the commonly quoted "4 nations" in the UK, there is a 5th - the British.
Those who are politically English and those who are politically Scots don't want to rule over each others territories. There is no automatic conflict between these nations.
The British, however, claim that the sovereignty of their Parliament covers Scotland as well - a nonsense in Scots constitutional law.
The Brits from Scotland want their party to rule in England - regardless of the views of the English.
The Brits from England want their party to rule in Scotland - regardless of the views of the Scots.
You say "Who was it who suppressed the McCrone report for 30 years?" I'd have thought that was pretty obvious. It was the British Governments acting in the interests of the British political elite - that included Brits from Scotland, in both Labour and Tory parties. It certainly wasn't the ordinary people who lived in England! They knew as little about it as we did.
Independence does involve conflict between nations. There has to be conflict between those of us who believe that the Scots are a nation who should determine their own affairs, and the British who believe that their nation includes all those within the territory of the UK. If one side wins, the other loses.
There is no such conflict between us and the English who want to run their own affairs with no intervention from those outwith England - and who wish the Scots well, if we choose Independence.
You are fighting the wrong war, against the wrong enemy, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons.
Complain about this comment
52. Electric Hermit
"I am not so easily taken in."
The political judgement of someone, who thinks that Alex Salmond is only pretending to be a nationalist, has to be more than a little suspect.
Complain about this comment
51. hamish42
"I hear this all the time in these comments, 'we don't blame the English', but who runs these institutions."
OK! So some of the people who run these institutions are English. But some of them are also Scottish. And Welsh. And Irish. The one thing they have in common is that they are first and foremost British.
Also bear in mind that there is a world of difference between people doing things who are English and people doing things because they are English.
Complain about this comment
52. Electric Hermit:
Stop being pompous.
And you still haven't explained what you mean by Tony Blair.
For the record, I do not trust 99% of politicians. Most are there for their own agendas.
But of course, I expect your response to be that only SNP politicians are there for the people, which is total codswallop. Most of them have their own agendas, Salmond included. Remember that he would not serve under Alex Neal, who in turn would not support Nicola Sturgeon for the deputy leadership.
Complain about this comment
Newsnicht - Lorraine Davidson admitting that Gordon Brown deliberately obstructed any concessions to Scotland! (as if we needed to be told that)
The discussion betrays a total misunderstanding of what the SNP are about. The Coalition are portrayed as being clever, and Labour silly for reacting wrongly to SNP "grievances".
We know from this blog that some will find grievance anywhere, but what the SNP did was to identify areas in which Scotland was being badly treated by the Brits. If these treatments are reversed, then the SNP has won for Scotland.
Complain about this comment
52. Electric Hermit
Here's a hobby for you.
Complain about this comment
61. Electric Hermit
We are back in agreement!
Complain about this comment
60. oldnat
"The political judgement of someone, who thinks that Alex Salmond is only pretending to be a nationalist, has to be more than a little suspect.
"
That would be the third sherry talking.
Complain about this comment
#46 enneffess
"I'd like to see all the pro-Euro supporters stand up and give a good reason why we should be in it now."
We are in a fluid situation. Let us not jump to conclusions. You will no doubt recall what John Maynard Keynes confidently predicted in 1927, just two years before the Wall Street crash that gave us the Great Depression: "We will not have any more crashes in our time." Oops!
Nonetheless, if one really wants to know why a country would want to be in the euro zone now, one could do worse, I suppose, than ask Estonia, which has just been admitted to it. One might also ask Chancellor Merkel, whose broad sturdy shoulders have been carrying the fate of the euro zone and of the European Union itself, while Blighty, whose GDP has shrunk by 10 per cent so far in the course of the great systemic crisis, does not possess the manufacturing industry or the exporting power and potential of Germany.
After Greece, Portugal and Spain . . . Blighty's credit rating may be downgraded, or so it is rumoured, but, as it is outside the euro zone, it will just have to look after itself, until the IMF steps in, presumably, as its public-debt burden becomes unbearable, launching headlong into deep public-spending cuts in all probability and shrinking the public sector with indecent haste, in the absence of substantial economic growth, which its unbalanced economy, unlike the economies of Germany and France, now appears to be incapable of producing, especially now that its huge financial-services sector is facing the prospect of being subjected to restrictions governing pure speculation throughout Europe and in America.
What remains of the UK is in peril of losing all its remaining pretensions to glorious power and influence in the world, because it is dangerously close to bankruptcy. It is standing on a treacherous trap door which may fall beneath it at any time. The facts of the UK's economic plight really ought to be faced up to, as its new coalition government appears to be beginning to show signs of doing.
Nonetheless, anglo-unionists will no doubt be puffing up their chests and doffing their caps, as is their wont, with a great stirring of emotion, when Her Gracious Majesty, in the ineffable finery and flummery of ancient royalty and inherited privilege, is paraded ceremonially before Her Britannic subjects at the forthcoming state opening of the Wasteminster parliament, escorted as per usual, no doubt, by her brilliantly uniformed household troops in brilliantly expensive procession. But one cannot escape asking a terrible but necessary question. On what does it all stand? Apart from sand, piles of it, giving way before our eyes.
It does seem hard on anglo-unionists that the traditions and triumphs of Blighty power and might should be touched by the ebb and flow of markets and commercial and speculative transactions in the vast swaying world which has sprung up and is growing ever larger around them and that they have to watch from month to month the narrow margins on which the UK's questionable solvency and influence depend.
Never in history have the pretensions of the Disunited Kingdom rested on such a precarious foundation. Lands and nations which the British have defeated in war or rescued from the subjugation of other subjugators are today more solidly sure of earning their living, not least the reunited Teutonic hordes, on which the economic salvation of Europe now depends and upon which the prize of European dominance is finally being bestowed.
All hail, Angela, Chancellor of Euroland.
Complain about this comment
I've just been through the Coalition agreement (rather skimpily, I'll admit).
There are few specifically Scottish references
"The Government fully supports the devolution of powers to Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
We will implement the proposals of the Calman Commission and introduce a referendum on further Welsh devolution.
We will review the control and use of accumulated and future revenues from the Fossil Fuel Levy in Scotland.
We will work with the Scottish Government to deliver a successful Commonwealth Games in Glasgow in 2014 "
Hard to see where the journos are getting their idea that the Coalition is "love-bombing" the SNP (or Scotland).
The major problem with the document (as always with the Brits) is that they still refuse to distinguish those policies which apply throughout the UK from those that apply only to those in England.
Now, I understand why. The Brits don't mind some nationalism in the "Celtic fringes". They assume that the power of their propaganda machine (which we pay for!) will minimise that.
The real threat to the Brits is that those in England demand democracy. It's not that the English are more important to the Brits - simply that there are a lot more of them.
Hence the continued obfuscation and confusion in the output of the Brit parties.
Complain about this comment
59 oldnat
"Independence does involve conflict between nations. There has to be conflict between those of us who believe that the Scots are a nation who should determine their own affairs, and the British who believe that their nation includes all those within the territory of the UK. If one side wins, the other loses."
The winners and the losers? a political football kicked to death by an ideology of Independence! shouldn't politics be about the progressive implementation of raising the peoples living standards, legislating for better schools and hospitals and the creation of a safe enviroment?
Methinks, the SNP! should adopt a new name' say' The Scottish Alliance Party! it could then adopt a principle progressive mandate to gradually endeavour to create more powers for the Scottish parliament, while concentrating on the main issue! the peoples right to a realistic chance of better living.
Complain about this comment
62. enneffess
"And you still haven't explained what you mean by Tony Blair."
I didn't think it was so obscure as to require being spelled out. It seems you don't recall that the word "new" was on everyone's lips back in 1997. How long did it take until it was brought home to us that Tony Blair was just another snake-oil salesman.
"But of course, I expect your response to be that only SNP politicians are there for the people..."
I'm sure you've already convinced yourself that I actually said that and not you.
Complain about this comment
65. oldnat
"We are back in agreement!"
I never thought we were anything else.
Complain about this comment
"skeletor joins labour leadership race"
Anyone?
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/skeletor-joins-labour-leadership-race-201005202750/
Complain about this comment
69. kered
"shouldn't politics be about the progressive implementation of raising the peoples living standards, legislating for better schools and hospitals and the creation of a safe enviroment?"
I wholly agree! However, there is a different dimension between Scottish and British politics. The Brits want Trident (and their consequent UN seat), interventionist foreign wars, all the trappings of pretension to being a world power. The Scots - don't.
For someone of your beliefs, why do you still cling to these trappings of the Empire instead of ensuring that available resources are allocated to improving social justice?
Just where do WMD play a role in your vision - other than covering the private parts of Bevan and his successors? (That's got to be the classic insecurity dream - going to an important meeting with no clothes on).
That could, indeed, be the explanation. Brit Socialists wanted to be Brit Imperialists but hadn't been to Eton - so the poor dears felt inadequate without the penile extensions that missiles provide.
There are cheaper alternatives - at least according to the spam on my e-mail before I changed it!
Complain about this comment
72. RyogaHibiki
LOL
Alas, our Skeletor is running the campaign for the elder Millipede.
Complain about this comment
73 oldnat
Yes! you raise a good question. Churchills last debate in the HOC was to agree with Bevan that the nuclear race was indeed a wholly manmade disaster.
Socialism, is not desinged around the notion of the Emporers cloths, great people gave a great deal too advance the struggle for betterment.I don't think we should just close the book, without writting the final chapter.
It's what a man or woman does with their education that counts?
if you oppose joined up goverments, then do you oppose the EU?
Why don't the SNP drop the "Nationalist" tag and sign up to a realistic view of progressive Scotland?.
Complain about this comment
Dear, dear. How did I miss it? The Times was being all racist a few weeks ago against the English:
English call for Scottish funding cut
New poll reveals two-thirds of English voters want next prime minister to slash funding north of the border
I did miss that particular article at the time and someone only just now called my attention to it. I hope some of you will complain to them about The Times' racism in referring to the English and stating that they have anti-Scottish opinions. Tsk.
Complain about this comment
75. kered
"Why don't the SNP drop the "Nationalist" tag and sign up to a realistic view of progressive Scotland?."
In that case, no doubt the UK should also drop its nationalism since nationalism is such an outdated concept.
Complain about this comment
77 GA
"In that case, no doubt the UK should also drop its nationalism since nationalism is such an outdated concept."
I don't think anyone that wants to live in a peaceful world would oppose that statement.
Complain about this comment
75. kered
"Why don't the SNP drop the "Nationalist" tag and sign up to a realistic view of progressive Scotland?. "
Ah! The "progressive" Scotland offered by Brit Labour? Where was the agreement from Brit labour to release the fossil fuel levy to kick-start jobs in the renewable industries?
If you want to join us in a coalition for a "progressive" Scotland that doesn't spend scarce resources on WMD or illegal interventionist wars, then you are more than welcome.
Unfortunately, as long as you support Brit Lab, you are nothing more than a vein in the fig leaf which hides the reality that not only does the Brit Empire have no clothes, it also lacks anything that your fig leaf would need to conceal!
For Brit Lab penile extensions, visit the following websites .......
Complain about this comment
76. GrannieAnne
"I hope some of you will complain to them about The Times' racism in referring to the English and stating that they have anti-Scottish opinions."
You seem to have learnt nothing. No one has ever suggested that using the term "English" to describe those people living in England is inappropriate (well I suppose that some Brits would object to anyone in the UK being separately categorised - but that's their problem).
But don't you understand the underlying dynamic? - the Brit argument, deployed in Scotland, that we were too poor, incompetent, and useless to run our own affairs, and needed subsidy has filtered south of the border. Actually not so much of a filter as a dam break!
When I first heard that appalling argument from Tory MP Lady Tweedsmuir in 1966, such comments remained in Scotland and were never heard in England. Fortunately, the Brits have been so stupid as to imagine that in the internet age, such arguments could be contained within Scotland.
30/40 years ago, such grievance politics were simply for Scots - though most of us have progressed beyond that now. For those in England this is relatively new. They have access to little data, and believe the Brit propaganda - a propaganda which is now increasingly counter-productive to the Brit agenda.
Should the English voters take the anti-Scot propaganda sufficiently seriously then they will demand fiscal autonomy for Scotland. Do we have a problem with that?
Complain about this comment
80. oldnat
"You seem to have learnt nothing. No one has ever suggested that using the term "English" to describe those people living in England is inappropriate (well I suppose that some Brits would object to anyone in the UK being separately categorised - but that's their problem)."
No, but saying that had a fixed and negative opinion about Scots most definitely was described as racist by you amongst others.
Obviously, they do.
Do I mind if they hate us enough to kick us out of their little Union? No. I just don't think their politicians will let them do any such thing and instead we'll have to put up with all this ire.
Complain about this comment
Here's The Deal........For London anyway.
Government Office for London
The Government has announced that the Government Office for London is to be abolished. Sponsor departments are now reviewing the functions that GOL carries out on their behalf and considering how those functions that need to continue will be delivered in the future.
More powers for The Mayor Of London, will the coalition treat Scotland fairly and abolish the Scottish Office and give more powers to the First Minister ?
Complain about this comment
3. eye_write
Yes. The word is "indigenous".
Oh well I lost the bet, silly me to think you would not bite.
Complain about this comment
70. Electric Hermit:
Did you ever consider that the reasons Blair won in 1997 was people were sick of a Tory government, and Blair was the first of a "new" type of politician. Of course, most politicians are the same underneath.
People were not so much taken in, but wanted change. And it is only by the majority wanting this will change happen.
---------------------
Grannie, xenophobic would be a better term. I know Scots of several races. But while oldnat says the media may affect the view of Scots by the English, precisely the same argument can be applied to those Scots who say the English are being xenophobic.
But where are the English masses demanding their own parliament? The English nationalist movement is a minority cause and probably will be for many, many years. There are far more serious issues ongoing with Europe at present which should be addressed rather than nationalism on our islands.
Complain about this comment
# 75 - "Why don't the SNP drop the "Nationalist" tag and sign up to a realistic view of progressive Scotland?"
How can a Scotland that is not free, does not have access to European or world stage and is governed by another country - be progressive? If Scotland remains a region of the uk, we remain a backwater.
Are labour asking the SDLP to drop their nationalist tag? No, the SDLP take the labour whip, but most importantly, they do not take votes from labour, SNP do. labour double standards!
The kudos or recognition Scotland has in the world is derived from her history when she was free and the peoples whom have emigrated from her.
Are you content to live in a progressive region that is governed by a conservative right wing government – is that the level of labour’s ambition for Scotland?
The SNP have been soft on labour in the past, mistakenly believing that ultimately labour in Scotland would put Scotland first, we were wrong. The new labour deception and the latest "turning your back on the people of Scotland" are examples of how duplicitous labour are. Have a progressive alliance with labour? No, you can not be trusted to put Scotland and her people first.
When the tories lay waste to Scotland, that will be the final chapter.
I concede that labour won the election in Scotland, but I have still to meet or hear a labour supporter whom believes they deserved to. labour are the ultimate blockage to " a progressive Scotland”.
C McK
Complain about this comment
Astonishingly, quite a vicious attack on Labour and Mr Gray re Ravenscraig in the Scotsman's comment page.
As to the other side and the glorious coalition (why Mr Salmond should regard Labour's Stalinists as progressive is beyond me), I'm reminded of when the Union Pacific and Southern Pacific railroads amalagamated after years of bitter rivalry. "It was an equal partnership; they took the first name of the old Union Pacific and the last name of the old Southern Pacific to form the name of the new company"
Complain about this comment
Setting: a wind blasted screen in the backwoods of Jockistan.
Unreconstructed cybernat Knollington dons kevlar vest and vaults fearlessly into Brian's blog crying "Scotland!" only to be swiftly punched to the ground by fellow nationalists while assorted fence sitters , unionists and non-aligned trolls stand on the sidelines laughing like drains.
Rumour has it Brownedov tried to come back too but he was found to have a red beard and turned back at the logging on stage.
The new regime is pitiless :O)
Complain about this comment
83. Anagach
Anagach, I didn't do the spelling correction! Check my post:
3. eye_write
"109. Anagach
Do you think that the term 'indiginous population' is incorrect ?.
Or do you think that the term 'indiginous population' has negative
connotations in common usage that make it a liability in public
relations ?"
Yes. I would use 'population'.
I had the word in inverted commas in my prior responses also as I had copied it, incorrect spelling and all from, em, I think it was Hamish's text in his original post. There was no point copying it correctly then I thought, as I wouldn't use the word at all.
Did you really have a bet I 'wouldn't bite'??
Complain about this comment
67. frankly francophone
"Nonetheless, anglo-unionists will no doubt be puffing up their chests and doffing their caps, as is their wont, with a great stirring of emotion, when Her Gracious Majesty, in the ineffable finery and flummery of ancient royalty and inherited privilege, is paraded ceremonially before Her Britannic subjects at the forthcoming state opening of the Wasteminster parliament, escorted as per usual, no doubt, by her brilliantly uniformed household troops in brilliantly expensive procession. But one cannot escape asking a terrible but necessary question. On what does it all stand? Apart from sand, piles of it, giving way before our eyes."
We are not worthy! 8-)
My favourite, from a very difficult choice!, "Her Britannic subjects".
Complain about this comment
Another blow for Labour. Tesco says it would back the introduction of a minimum price. As Tesco almost certainly has more supporters than Labour then I think that's job done :-)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8696097.stm
Complain about this comment
There is only one non unionist party in Scotland, wee ecks one man band party. A party, whose supporters see this blog as their playground. They remind me of George Orwell's 1984. They monitor the comments and pounce on the unwary for daring not to adhere to politic speak. You will notice key words are the trigger for their attention, words like "new" "unionist" "tories" "labour" lib-dem" and of course certain bloggers are automatic targets for their attention. Perhaps, wee ecks one man band party supporters do not like how some people are open and willing to give this new politics a chance. On the other hand may be they just do not like people having opinions at all.
Complain about this comment
76. GrannieAnne
"I hope some of you will complain to them about The Times' racism in referring to the English and stating that they have anti-Scottish opinions. Tsk."
You ability to stoop is certainly something ;-)
Indeed you have learned nothing. This headline was taken from actual data. What you did however was to lower yourself to blind name-calling: "Everything, according to the English, is Scotland's fault". Very poor.
You cast aspersions. The Times conducted a poll.
Had you said, "according to [a certain percentage] of" or "according to two thirds of" the English, then we could have given your opinion merit.
It is factual to refer to our neighbours as "The English". But it does not mean we can punitively, and with impunity, slander them with attributes that apply, without proof, across the board, in so doing. Which you did.
Complain about this comment
81. GrannieAnne
"No, but saying that had a fixed and negative opinion about Scots most definitely was described as racist by you amongst others."
That was absolutely not what was said to you. (It's the way you use it to slag all English folk.) That you chose to undestand it that way is worrying.
My theory is that you just cannot be told you may be a bit wrong on something - it must be us that misunderstood you. So you dig and dig, until you reach Australia...
But everybody knows nobody thinks the term "The English" has a fixed negative.
It's just that you've continually, assertively and unapologetically used it that way.
Complain about this comment
mmm no mention of the 5000 job losses in the NHS this week then?
I now see Mr Gray as the wee boy who always cried wolf that my mother was always telling me about!
the wee boy lived in a village and used to run about shouting there was a wolf in the village when there was indeed no wolf. and surprise surprise the one time there was a wolf in the village everyone ignored the wee boy because he had lied so often in the past!
Sid.
Complain about this comment
Lib Dems 'deterred' by Trident.
Newsnet Scotland
Complain about this comment
91. Ron McArthur
"Perhaps, wee ecks one man band party supporters do not like how some people are open and willing to give this new politics a chance. On the other hand may be they just do not like people having opinions at all."
Well, as an independence supporter I am happy to give this latest evolution of politics a chance - stupid to publically slag something that has not yet been proved to deserve a slagging. I'm sorry some of the other posters have perhaps given you the opposite impression. I have said that makes independence supporters look silly, but...
Complain about this comment
91. At 09:59am on 21 May 2010, Ron McArthur wrote:
There is only one non unionist party in Scotland
Wrong.
Complain about this comment
81. GrannieAnne
93. eye_write
"That was absolutely not what was said to you.
Hang on, I may have misread your quote there, GrannieAnne. Apologies. Yes, using "the English" to have a fixed negative is indeed wrong and racist. Hope that clears it up.
Complain about this comment
61. Electric Hermit
"The one thing they have in common is that they are first and foremost British."
Yes, excellent post.
Complain about this comment
75. kered
"Why don't the SNP drop the "Nationalist" tag and sign up to a realistic view of progressive Scotland?"
Is this an example of the 'nationalist' tag being held in such low regard as that is is always seen in pejorative terms? So there's no way anything 'nationalist' can be progressive?
Granted there are some outdated ultra-naff independence supporters clinging around, every party has their own unflattering bunch I suppose.
But have you thought that self government, like in other European countries (many termed more 'socialist'?), might be the best way and the opportunity to accomplish successfully that society you want?
As you say in your 69:
"a political football kicked to death by an ideology of Independence! shouldn't politics be about the progressive implementation of raising the peoples living standards, legislating for better schools and hospitals and the creation of a safe enviroment?"
I'm not sure independence is an ideology, but a mechanism (for change).
Complain about this comment
97. At 10:19am on 21 May 2010, Online Ed wrote:
Agree, sorry, should have said they seem to think they are the only non unionist party in Scotland. Thanks for correction.
Complain about this comment
96. At 10:17am on 21 May 2010, eye_write wrote
I do agree with what you say and accept you have displayed a willingness to be open minded and give fair and reasonable comments.I have also noticed that you are a frequent target of the people I was was talking about. Big brother does not share the same open mindedness, keep up the good work.
Complain about this comment
84. enneffess
"People were not so much taken in, but wanted change. And it is only by the majority wanting this will change happen.
"
You're picking nits here. The point surely is that they wanted change and voted for it. Only to find that it was all a sham. So far, I've no reason to suppose 2010 is any different from 1997. Except, of course, that in 2010 people didn't actually vote for anything very much. If the general election results are any kind of message from the people, then that message says, "Please can we have things much the same as they've always been!".
Complain about this comment
91. Ron McArthur
"There is only one non unionist party in Scotland, wee ecks one man band party."
Alex Salmond will one day step down from the leadership of the SNP. Then your one and only thought will be completely redundant.
Complain about this comment
49. At 9:29pm on 20 May 2010, oldnat wrote:
It's the "British" Broadcasting Corporation. That should give you a clue. They are run by the Brits based in London.
I must have missed that day in school. The one where it was
explained that 'British' means that spending and management
of all must be centralised in London.
Complain about this comment
101. Ron McArthur
"Agree, sorry, should have said they seem to think they are the only non unionist party in Scotland. Thanks for correction."
Get used to it. You will need a lot more correcting. Not that it seems to make any difference. Your puerile "one man band" nonsense has been corrected repeatedly and still you persist in the same error. I guess you're just a slow learner.
Complain about this comment
101. At 10:46am on 21 May 2010, Ron McArthur wrote:
97. At 10:19am on 21 May 2010, Online Ed wrote:
Agree, sorry, should have said they seem to think they are the only non unionist party in Scotland
Why do you say that?
Complain about this comment
7. FatherMacKenzie
With respect what you are saying is that Police priorities should be set in Edinburgh as they pay the piper as you put it. That is massive centralisation, if applied to other council functions such as education and social work it would mean more for Edinburgh and Glasgow and less for rural Scotland. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the needs of rural Scotland would be difficult to hear in such a process.
It is amusing that independence and devolvement of power is good in Holyrood but bad everywhere else. Amazing you can't see the obvious contradiction.
Complain about this comment
I take the moderators aren't clock-watchers.
A BwB thread open for over 24 hours...?
Complain about this comment
40. At 6:21pm on 20 May 2010, Robin wrote:
I also spent a lot of time reading about British history as far back as I could go - mostly the post-Roman/Dark Age period - and got the impression that the Anglo-Saxon colonisation mostly displaced only some of the population in the East and South - not really having a huge effect on Wales or most of Scotland, and not even on all of England. ]
A good part of the East, including Edinburgh, was part of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria.
Complain about this comment
100 aye-write
Granted! I think there is a strong will in Scotland to be more like our European neighbours.(although i can't see anyone agreeing to the single currency at this time?)
I simply suggest that the SNP are stuck in a rut and should reflect on where they go from here.
You may broaden the base of support if the !Nationalist" tag was dropped.
An Alliance! that wants to progress Scotland, is a realistic view.
There have been countless debates on this site about Independence however the reality is, that notion is no further forward than it was three years ago.
I think the Scottish parliament should reject the Calman report! I would suggest that Alex Salmond calls for a great debate about the future of Scottish politics, built on the principle of making Scotland a better place and of course how the parliament gains power.The headache for all parties, is the relevant fact, that unless you can form a coalition in Scotland, then you are most likely to be a minority government.Parliament has the responsibility to deliver for Scotland, all past FM agree that there sholud be more powers for Scotland, surely the proper function would be for all MSP's to have the big debate about the future progress of the process of Parliament.
Complain about this comment
100. eye_write
The problem as I see it is there is a lack of a clear strategy at present. Many people in Scotland simply are not convinced of the need to change. There is no burning desire for change amongst the people and if anything the desire for change is less than it has been.
There are many reasons for this possibly the strongest is that in times of such uncertainty change is even less attractive. Also looking at Ireland, Portugal and Greece, you have to ask how independent they really are just now, the French and Germans appear to set the economic agenda for these smaller countries more and more.
Had we been independent and in the Euro we would not have control over our public finances to the extent we have just now. Accepting that devaluation is in effect another pay later scheme, as is quantitative easing, the reality is that the public really just see the differences on the ground.
However the main problem for the SNP is they have not articulated a vision of what an independent Scotland would look like, what it could achieve. More importantly, why this would be so much better than being part of the UK, which has delivered better living standards each generation for the last 300 years.
Such a vision is required to build consensus for change. When devolution was finally achieved, consensus was in place before the referendum, people had accepted that it was a step forward.
We are nowhere near that consensus position just now in relation to independance. The election results were even more frightening when the Glasgow North and East results are considered in a wider context. These communities have been failed by every government in living memory of any colour. Yet they fail to grasp any idea of a different outcome, any idea of hope.
In Glasgow East they went back to what they trusted. They just don't buy the current vision. This is a real failure to communicate a positive vision, to build trust and confidence in a different way.
Much more work is needed to reach out and articulate what can be achieved to all areas of Scotland if sucess is to be achieved. There needs to be a clear strategy and it needs to change.
Alex was right to use the first term to demonstrate competent government, this has largely been achieved. The party now needs to move to create and articulate a vision that can build consensus. My fear is that Alex is not the man to build consensus. At some point his time will be up as it is for all politicians. Perhaps the time is right for some change in direction if the goal is to be achieved.
Complain about this comment
6. At 12:54pm on 20 May 2010, DrK wrote:
I hope my opinion of ConDem is wrong and they do play fair with Scotland, but remember there is the Scottish Elections next year, so I doubt the ConDem will do anything to drastic this year, but once the election is out of the way, then they will show their true colours.
Complain about this comment
105. At 11:25am on 21 May 2010, Anagach wrote:
49. At 9:29pm on 20 May 2010, oldnat wrote:
It's the "British" Broadcasting Corporation. That should give you a clue. They are run by the Brits based in London.
I must have missed that day in school. The one where it was
explained that 'British' means that spending and management
of all must be centralised in London.
If you don't understand oldnat's post - I think you must have missed a lot more than a day of school! :)
Complain about this comment
110. At 12:27pm on 21 May 2010, Morrigan wrote:
"40. At 6:21pm on 20 May 2010, Robin wrote:
A good part of the East, including Edinburgh, was part of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria."
Yup, mostly the East and South like I said. The thing I found fascinating is the amount of "traffic" that still took place through the area from Wales, or even Cornwall, right up the western side of England to the west of Scotland for a long time after the Angles and Saxons appeared on the scene.
I had orignally been digging to see if I could find any evidence to support the King Arthur myths - largely because just outside Darvel, where I live, there's a place that's said to be the site of one of his battles - and noticed a lot of the sources came from roughly the area I mentioned at around the time I had originally assumed, completely wrongly, that Scotland and Wales were peopled by Celts and England, pretty much other than the Cornish, by Anglo-Saxons.
Another thing that struck me was that the biggest long-standing cultural division in Britain seemed to have grown up between the Romanised and non-Romanised areas - notably between the Scottish Highland and lowlands which persisted until very recently (arguably, it's still perceptible).
All of which should highlight that nationalism does not really have that much to do with racism, xenophobia or even "indigenous cultural differences"...
Complain about this comment
#111, derek:
"i can't see anyone agreeing to the single currency at this time"
Indeed, the sooner we revert to the pound Scots and the merk, etc., the better!
Complain about this comment
"103. At 11:15am on 21 May 2010, Electric Hermit wrote:
84. enneffess
"People were not so much taken in, but wanted change. And it is only by the majority wanting this will change happen.
"
You're picking nits here. The point surely is that they wanted change and voted for it. Only to find that it was all a sham. So far, I've no reason to suppose 2010 is any different from 1997. Except, of course, that in 2010 people didn't actually vote for anything very much. If the general election results are any kind of message from the people, then that message says, "Please can we have things much the same as they've always been!"."
Now do you understand why I said that the SNP campaign in the recent election was a mess? People obviously voted for the same because the alternative on offer wasn't very appealing in it's presentation.
Complain about this comment
can i just predict that if the west Lothian question IS addressed and Scottish mp's are quite correctly banned from voting on English only issues, we will see the uk labour party quickly loosing interest in Scotland, as Scotland will cease to be a usable bank of votes for them. Lets face it all Scottish MPS should be voting on in Westminster are defence, benefits and foreign affairs. in-fact in reality it might be the end of the road for the labour party in general. (with any luck)
Complain about this comment
112. At 12:47pm on 21 May 2010, NorthernSole wrote:
100. eye_write
However the main problem for the SNP is they have not articulated a vision of what an independent Scotland would look like, what it could achieve. More importantly, why this would be so much better than being part of the UK, which has delivered better living standards each generation for the last 300 years
I agree that there is not enough emphisis on what scotland could achive if independent. The SNP has to somehow begin to promote the benefits of an indipendent Scotland rather than just solely critisising the status que. I think this could be done.
I disagree with the claim that the unioun has delivered better standards of living over the last 300 years.
It was the inteligence invention and hard work of Scots that has improved the UK econnomy.
It all started with the Scottish churches decision to try to educate every child way back in the 18th Century that propelled Scotland in to the industrial revolution, we were not dragged their by mother england. It was our engineers and boilermakers that powered the whole "english" Empire. If over that three hundred years we had not been drained of the profits, this would be a very rich nation indeed.
Complain about this comment
111. kered
"I simply suggest that the SNP are stuck in a rut and should reflect on where they go from here."
The SNP is now the party of government in Scotland and heading for a substantial increase in its vote next year. Compare that with almost any point in the party's history and only a blinkered fool would deny the progress that has been made.
"You may broaden the base of support if the !Nationalist" tag was dropped."
The name of the party is the Scottish National Party. It is thus called because it is the national party of Scotland.
Complain about this comment
On the economy here is a typical senario which shows why the present economic system is doomed to failure.
Thirty years ago a farmer owned a farm. He had 3 workers whom he paid weekly. He sold his cattle at the local market to the local butcher. who sold the mea to locals and local hotels and restaurants.
His three workers were paid and spent their wages localy in those shops and restaurants.
The cash remained local and was distributed localy.
Thirty years on the farmer decides that the salesman's pitch was good and he buys a super dooper tractor that did the work of his three men.
They get made redundant.
He has to go the Mega bank international to borrow the £100K to by the machine.
He gets all his work done and the cattle ar reared. Mr Tesda the multi national supermarket, boroows money of Mega bank int. and builds a chain of shops. He buys the meat direct from the farmer at a price he dictates as he has to buy cheap because they have to pay of the loan to Mega bank international for the expansion program. The potoatoes the and the meat from the cattle are transported 600 miles and the price inflated 200% on cost as it is sold as premium Scottish produce.
Meanwhile the farmer uses the little money obtained to pay his loan instalments to Mega Bank international, who invest the interst made from the loan in the futures market on Wall street. The tractor firm have already taken there payment away to Canada.
The farmer then spends whats left at Tesda and that is again spirited away to the city for forigen investment. and the government are having to keep the three redundant ment in food (bought again at Tesda) and housing.
Eventualy the local community are surviving at a subsistance level as all the money is slowly but surely drains out of the country.
Meanwhile the 120k spent on the tractor could have been used to employ at least two of the men made redundant!
Pure capitalism is like a board game, one person always ends up with all the money.
Its time to make capitalism local again and by that I mean localy here in Scotland!
Complain about this comment
Here's a better deal...
http://tinyurl.com/fancy-a-buckie
Complain about this comment
I don't accept that the Calman proposals can be implemented without a referendum. This is just not on.
Complain about this comment
112 Northernsole
I agree totally about the articulation of the vision, but right at the moment the SNP government is having to work blindfolded and handcuffed to try and look after the here and now issues that are coming our way. The cuts from westminster, the politicking with their deferral, the Calman stitch up trap. There's a lot in the in tray to be going on with.
And how will we get to know about this vision when the media here go out of their way to spin anything negatively against the SNP.
it's also up to all of us to start articulating this to all around us. The story can be quite simple, based around finance and political values.
Complain about this comment
117. enneffess
I agree, but remember all governments promise more than they can deliver for many reasons. Firstly good ideas don't always make it through the parliamentary process for a number of reasons sometimes they are just not practical to implement.
Every government faces the next election with broken promises, it is just inevitable. Next years Holyrood election will result in critical examination of the SNP record, some things will stand out as not being done and the "same as the rest" tar brush will be applied in some measure.
It is an inevitable consequence of power.
What is required is new vision that invigorates the electorate, a new direction that offers a chance of real change.
When you examine the likely policy debate at the next Holyrood elections there are small differences between the SNP and Labour on the big issues and smaller differences come under the microsope and people feel change is not on offer.
So I agree a bold change of direction is required that can demonstrate a new offering. If the rhetoric doesn't change then we will just be managing ever decreasing circles.
Complain about this comment
117. enneffess
"Now do you understand why I said that the SNP campaign in the recent election was a mess?"
By what standard was it a "mess"? The party actually gained a little ground in circumstances where it would have been expected to lose ground
"People obviously voted for the same because the alternative on offer wasn't very appealing in it's presentation."
An analysis which relies entirely on simplicity for its appeal. I suspect there were actually a number of factors involved. The major factors being an expectation of a Tory victory and the dishonest claim by the British Labour Party that it could prevent this - coupled with a massive combined campaign by the Tory/BLP alliance to marginalise all the alternative parties.
In the face of such a concerted campaign supported by all the media, it is remarkable that the SNP vote held up at all.
Complain about this comment
106. At 11:33am on 21 May 2010, Electric Hermit wrote:
I am very used to you coming alone and having you offer me your pearls of wisdom + your attempts at correcting what you regards as my mistakes. I may be in your opinion a slow learner, but at least I am willing to learn. I have learned a great deal. I have learned, some people have a single track mind, can only see what they want other people to see, have no idea or care how other people perceive them. Some people think this is their playground and will try along with their pals, to bully people they class as non believers.
Complain about this comment
There are certain people on this blog who take exception to my " wee eck and his one man band party" If you think I have this wrong, please answer me this. If John Swinney was doing such a great job of leading the SNP, Why did wee eck leave Westminster and take on the Leadership of His party. I have repeatedly stated Alex Salmond is a very able and competant politican, Im not trying to belittle him. I simply think he is the overwhelming asset of his party. I think even certain party members think the same, are you honestly telling me Ms Sturgeon, John Swinney or Fiona Hyslop are ready to step into his shoes.
Complain about this comment
118. At 2:35pm on 21 May 2010, patchbruce wrote:
The West Lothian Question will not arise in this parliament, even if all the 59 mp's in Scotland voted with all the other opposition parties against the government, they would not have enough to overturn the governments majority.
Complain about this comment
120. At 2:50pm on 21 May 2010, Electric Hermit wrote:
"The SNP is now the party of government in Scotland and heading for a substantial increase in its vote next year."
Maybe, compared to the general election result, in fact I'd be astonished if the vote didn't improve on that. My son was at the count in Kilmarnock and was as angry as I've ever seen him because the SNP had lost every single box - including here in the Upper Irvine Valley where the party has been winning consistently for many years now. So it's almost unthinkable that the Scottish Parliament elctions will be that bad.
But I haven't seen any solid evidence to suggest that the party will do better than it did at the last Scottish Parliament elections.
"Compare that with almost any point in the party's history and only a blinkered fool would deny the progress that has been made."
Yes, the SNP does seem to be making progress in that it's undoubtedly taken more seriously than it was in the past. But enough to win the majority in the Scottish Parliament that it needs to hold a referendum? That's very hard to imagine when the Labour Party set the Parliament up, with it's PR system, to make it as difficult as possible for anyone, and particularly the SNP, to win a majority. The whole point of the exercise was to delay independence, and to block the SNP's progress, as much as possible. Some of them even claimed it would mean the end of the SNP...
And, despite the progress the SNP has made as a political party, support for independence is still no stronger than it has been for decades. And without that support, it's not going to happen.
Of course, if a majority were in favour of independence, it would happen even if it was not the SNP who delivered it. Remember that after defeating Gladstone's reform bill in 1866 it was Disraeli who delivered a reform bill in 1867, to give the Tories a better chance of increasing their own support from a grateful electorate and gaining a majority.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Labour Party pulled a similar manouvre here if the Scots demanded independence, purely to hold on to any power they could. They would happily take the credit for it even if they don't want it.
But only the SNP can do the work to create sufficient support for independence in the first place though - and, as I've said, I see nothing to suggest that support is growing.
Complain about this comment
120. Electric Hermit
"Compare that with almost any point in the party's history and only a blinkered fool would deny the progress that has been made."
What right/qualification do you have to insult all and sundry at will? Ever wondered why your own website is as dead as a cemetary in the depths of winter try removing the blinkered bias and return to humanity as it is a lot less hostile.
Complain about this comment
128. At 4:12pm on 21 May 2010, Ron McArthur wrote:
"I have repeatedly stated Alex Salmond is a very able and competant politican, Im not trying to belittle him. I simply think he is the overwhelming asset of his party. I think even certain party members think the same, are you honestly telling me Ms Sturgeon, John Swinney or Fiona Hyslop are ready to step into his shoes. "
He's more than just able and competent, but if he did step down I'd be perfectly happy to see someone like Kenny McAskill replacing him - he has different strengths to Alex Salmond, who is probably the best performer on tv out of all the politicians in this country, but I wouldn't see Kenny as an inferior replacement overall. And I know plenty of party members (which I'm not), who have a similar respect for him.
And, although he would be my personal preference, I'm sure Nicola Sturgeon, amongst others, would have a lot of support. You never really know how anyone will perform as a party leader - the best ones grow into it.
Complain about this comment
The simple reason for the static nature of the SNP vote at the election can simply be put down to the very successful campaign to turn this election in to a presidential affair by the BBC. For four weeks we were told that only three parties mattered, if you are not a fully committed nationalist or indeed not that interested in politics,you could have easily been convinced by this, it is human nature after all to follow leaders if you are not a leader yourself, and if your told there are only three leaders that is all you will look for. It was the BBC who won the election. not the political parties.
Complain about this comment
132. At 5:26pm on 21 May 2010, Robin wrote:
Thanks Robin, I am happy to accept your opinion, would not completely agree and I note Mr Swinney did not merit a mention. Also thanks for not pointing out my spelling mistake. I am sure some one will.
Complain about this comment
121. patchbruce
"Its time to make capitalism local again and by that I mean localy here in Scotland!"
I am very much in agreement. But the big opportunity that came when the banks screwed up so magnificently was wasted because there was no political will to take them on even when they were so weak they couldn't stand unaided.
And let us never forget that this is democracy in action. The people voted for no change. Which is precisely what they were going to get anyway. So, in the mind of your average voter, he/she has been proven right.
Complain about this comment
134. At 6:06pm on 21 May 2010, Ron McArthur wrote:
"Thanks Robin, I am happy to accept your opinion, would not completely agree and I note Mr Swinney did not merit a mention. Also thanks for not pointing out my spelling mistake. I am sure some one will."
Actually, I also have a lot of respect for John Swinney, who I supported for the leadership in preference to Alex Neil when I was a party member - despite the fact that I was always one of the fundamentalists in the party, like Alex Neil, while John Swinney was the gradualist candidate.
I didn't mention him because, having been leader in the past I would not expect him to be a candidate for the leadership again. Of course, if that did happen, it wouldn't be the first time...
I try never to comment on spelling mistakes. Apart from anything else, I've noticed that when people do that they often fall foul of their own typos.
Anyway, I've already invented the word "elctions" today and I've called myself Robib more than once...
Complain about this comment
127. Ron McArthur
"I may be in your opinion a slow learner..."
I am happy to let the evidence speak for itself.
But congratulations on managing a "contribution" notable for nothing other than the absence of your sole catch-phrase.
Complain about this comment
131. clammylegg
"What right/qualification do you have to insult all and sundry at will? Ever wondered why your own website is as dead as a cemetary in the depths of winter try removing the blinkered bias and return to humanity as it is a lot less hostile."
Diddums!
Complain about this comment
133. At 5:36pm on 21 May 2010, patchbruce wrote:
"The simple reason for the static nature of the SNP vote at the election can simply be put down to the very successful campaign to turn this election in to a presidential affair by the BBC. For four weeks we were told that only three parties mattered"
If that's the case, how come the Greens made progress but the LibDems didn't?
Complain about this comment
132. Robin
"He's more than just able and competent, but if he did step down I'd be perfectly happy to see someone like Kenny McAskill replacing him..."
The idiots who chant the "one man band mantra" really don't have a clue. They would like to create a false impression but the simple fact is that there is no challenge to Salmond's leadership at the moment. And this is not because there are no adequately qualified contenders. It is solely because everybody who has the merest smidgeon of political awareness recognises that Salmond is a significant political force.
If any doubt this, take a look at the contenders for leadership of the British Labour Party.
Complain about this comment
133. patchbruce
Spot on!
Complain about this comment
139. Robin
"If that's the case, how come the Greens made progress but the LibDems didn't?"
You just have to acccept that every once in a while the candidate actually wins on merit.
Complain about this comment
142. At 6:53pm on 21 May 2010, Electric Hermit wrote:
"You just have to acccept that every once in a while the candidate actually wins on merit."
Which doesn't explain why the LibDems conspicuously failed to make any progress despite not only being included in the "presidential" contest, but also having Nick Clegg widely reported to have performed extremely well in the debates, and even said to be the clear winner in the first one.
(I didn't see much of the debates, but I don't think it's inaccurate to suggest that Clegg got the best PR out of them)
Complain about this comment
143. Robin
"Which doesn't explain why the LibDems conspicuously failed to make any progress despite not only being included in the "presidential" contest, but also having Nick Clegg widely reported to have performed extremely well in the debates, and even said to be the clear winner in the first one."
The sole and entire purpose of the rigged Party Election Broadcasts (or TV "debates") was to marginalise alternative parties and reaffirm the old two-party duopoly. The party managers misjudged things a bit with the brief blossoming of "Cleggmania", but that little blip was quickly corrected.
What was remarkable about the election just past was not the transitory relevance of the LibDems. It was the ability of the Tory/BLP alliance to continue to dominate UK politics despite the fact that the public were supposedly hungry for change. No wonder the ruling elite are so smug. They have just proved they can get away with anything. The sheeple will still vote for more of the same.
Complain about this comment
112. NorthernSole
The blog is still open - I'm shocked ;-)
Many people in Scotland simply are not convinced of the need to change.
You make fair comment. Scotland in the modern age has always been too much of a comparatively rich western nation to be swayed much towards independence by politics of grievance about our position. I've pondered before if it therefore needed real hard times before we would see mood change. But I don't want Scotland to be destroyed before it is independent. So, my latest reformed view is that it may well depend on the perceived difference by voters between the last few years and those predictably harder ones coming, as to whether this will in fact trigger desire for such a change. It's likely to be a factor in some fashion, I would predict, somewhat obviously.
(I'm going to post in bits, just in case the blog closes.)
Complain about this comment
Just been reading a short history of the Union on the BBC Scottish History site. The first two scentences are as follows:-
The Thistle and the Rose - British Union
‘Scotland is a beggar and whoever marries a beggar can only expect a louse for her portion’.
The Tory leader Edward Seymour on the subject of Union with Scotland in the English Parliament, 1700
Has anything really changed? Roll on Independence and we will see who is the beggar!
Complain about this comment
112. NorthernSole
"Many people in Scotland simply are not convinced of the need to change."
Or it may be that they simply don't see Westminster as a vehicle for such change as they want. And who can blame them for that? If Westminster is about anything it is about maintaining the status quo.
Scotland's Parliament is viewed somewhat differently, I suspect.
Complain about this comment
Re: 144. At 7:56pm on 21 May 2010, Electric Hermit
Yes, I'm more in agreement with that. Despite the 3 party nature of the TV debates, in the end the election still came down to the usual 2 party squeeze.
My own feeling is that the LibDems failed to provide any real, credible alternative and people, as usual, voted for the party they saw as the one best able to beat the party they disliked the most.
But, in Scotland, independence does give us a REAL alternatve, something that can capture the imagination and give people hope that we can make things better. That's why I would always rather see the SNP fighting elections on independence and all the positive benefits it would bring us, than an, essentially negative, anti-Tory or anti-Labour platform based on resisting cuts or better management (of the economy, etc.)
Complain about this comment
115. Robin
Another thing that struck me was that the biggest long-standing cultural division in Britain seemed to have grown up between the Romanised and non-Romanised areas - notably between the Scottish Highland and lowlands which persisted until very recently (arguably, it's still perceptible).
It's more a product of post Reformation developments, in particular the historical coincidence that the retreat of Gaelic happened to (more or less) coincide with the geological Highland Line at the time of the Reformation, which added a religious distinction to the linguistic distinction between Highlands and Lowlands. It also had the result of confining the area defined as "the Highlands" to lands north of Clyde and Forth.
Previously the definition of the Highlands had been much wider. There's a wonderful illustration of this from the poem The Flyting of Dumbar and Kennedie from 1504. In this poem the poets William Dunbar and Walter Kennedy have a verbal jousting match over which of them was the better Scotsman, the Scots speaking Lowlander Dunbar or the Gaelic speaking Hielanman Kennedy.
Although he was a native Gaelic speaker was regarded as a Highlander, Kennedy actually came from southern Ayrshire. Gaelic survived in small pockets of southern Ayrshire and Galloway until as late as the end of the 18th century.
Complain about this comment
112. NorthernSole
"Had we been independent..."
This, of course, is another argument which cannot succeed, on its own. I could, and you could, put together a strong coherent, 'evidence based' case for what we could have been like if independent [pick a time] years ago. My own view is that we would have been in a stronger position, but I can't give proof, nobody can in so much as the electorate would trust it. It would be my/your word against their instinct, gut feeling or their own perceived lack of ability, through admitted insufficient knowledge, to be able to tell one way or the other. So it seems a futile project. Though a worthwhile exercise I think, it's one best suited to the annals of historical investigation. A feel a really good documentary coming on... :-)
Complain about this comment
148. Robin
"That's why I would always rather see the SNP fighting elections on independence and all the positive benefits it would bring us, than an, essentially negative, anti-Tory or anti-Labour platform based on resisting cuts or better management (of the economy, etc.)"
That's fine if you have some influence over the agenda. In the election just past the SNP had virtually no control of its own campaign because of the way the rigged Party Election Broadcasts defined the media coverage. Which is why I get a little impatient with those who criticise the SNP strategy. Such criticism is pointless because it was not, in truth, the SNP strategy at all. The party was constantly obliged to respond to the rigged PEBs from which it was excluded. There are supposed to be laws in the UK to prevent this sort of manipulation of the media. At the behest of the Tory/BLP alliance the broadcasters flouted those laws. It remains to be seen whether a precedent has been set which will alter UK politics for the foreseeable future.
Complain about this comment
150. eye_write
"This, of course, is another argument which cannot succeed, on its own. I could, and you could, put together a strong coherent, 'evidence based' case for what we could have been like if independent [pick a time] years ago."
A hugely pointless exercise as Scotland was never going to be allowed to be independent any more than Wales or Ireland. Although it might be interesting to speculate as to what exactly our larger, more powerful neighbour was afraid of. And whether those fears have any resonance today.
I am sceptical. Those times are at too far a remove to add anything truly meaningful to any analysis of today's political landscape.
Complain about this comment
112. NorthernSole
"However the main problem for the SNP is they have not articulated a vision of what an independent Scotland would look like, what it could achieve."
A very interesting point. I do agree desire for independence has hit something of a rut, perhaps not surprisingly with the government which wishes it having being in mid term and sort of established itself, in Scotland, as the establishment. I speak in terms of how the voting public, I think, views what's going on. It's my opinion, but I'm not an idiot, so (to non-fans) disagree but it is optional whether to deride. But whatever, the notion of independence as I have observed does not seem new or shiny. In fact it's the opposite, independence as a goal has a bad image problem indeed - very.
The problem is of course that the SNP party can show us what it is like in government and is able to build confidence by example. Changes of government we have tried before, so that chance was open to it, via normal politics, campaigning and other things etc. We cannot demonstrate independence in the same way. That coupled with my point in 145, makes it a big step, easily received as unnecessary. Which is why gradually is the way to get there. Fiscal autonomy will be the big 'demonstration', if it is implemented fairly, without any accompanying sly tricks, of how we can be independent.
Complain about this comment
152. Electric Hermit
Indeed, agreed. That was what I was saying. I do find it very interesting though. Want that all the voters were such sad geeks ;-)
Complain about this comment
151. Electric Hermit, I agree with that. The SNP were effectively shut out by the media so you can only criticize their campaign if they were given a level playing field.
As to the "Salmond is a one man band" mantra of some posters this is of course wishful thinking on the part of worried unionists. It's the Dr. Eckvil syndrome, once the evil genius disappears it will all stop.
They hope people are dim enough to buy into their suggestion that it's all a personality cult built around the First Minister and that if he leaves the whole troublesome nonsense will cease. They like to treat the SNP as a tartan and shortbread cult rather than a real political party.
You never hear anyone suggest that the Conservatives will cease to exist without David Cameron. The Party was around long before Salmond and will of course exist long after him but in the meantime he's doing a very good job and that's more than irritating to some.
Complain about this comment
"139. At 6:45pm on 21 May 2010, Robin wrote:
If that's the case, how come the Greens made progress but the LibDems didn't?"
The Green MP Caroline Lucas is a very popular an well known individual in Brighton. Too many people on here seem to forget that many MPs are returned to the Commons because they are very good constituency MPs, despite their party's failings. Look at Ed Balls for example. Just about everyone was wanting his head, but his constituency returned him solidly.
That is why SNP candidates need to be more visible at a local level. In my area, the first most people knew about their SNP candidate was when the leaflet flew through the door.
Had the election been one where you chose a party rather than an individual MP, chances are Labour would have lost many more seats.
Complain about this comment
133. patchbruce:
See my #156.
It is not entirely the BBC's or any other media organisation's fault.
Try and apportion some blame to the SNP strategy.
Complain about this comment
155. GrassyKnollington
"They hope people are dim enough to buy into their suggestion that it's all a personality cult built around the First Minister..."
That raised a smile. Was there ever a more unlikely candidate to be at the centre of a personality cult?
Complain about this comment
157. enneffess wrote "Try and apportion some blame to the SNP strategy."
I confess I found "more nats less cuts " to be truly dire. I winced every time I heard it.
Complain about this comment
"128. At 4:12pm on 21 May 2010, Ron McArthur wrote:
I think even certain party members think the same, are you honestly telling me Ms Sturgeon, John Swinney or Fiona Hyslop are ready to step into his shoes."
Swinney wouldn't be considered in the near future, and Hyslop has no chance.
Sturgeon is the prime choice in the current political climate, and possibly MacAskill. Both are younger for starters and confident in the media spotlight.
Sturgeon especially is extremely good in television interviews (probably due to her legal training) and I'd argue she comes across better in interviews than Salmond, who is better in bruising political debates.
But bar those individuals, few others are well enough known. Alex Neal has been around, but he is of the old school and unlikely to drive the party through, plus Salmond/Sturgeon and him do not get on. Mike Russell is also a possible, but again it is down to visibility. Some of the Scottish Goverment cabinet members are as well known as whosisname of the alleged opposition up here.
Alex Salmond IS the SNP to many people, which is both good and bad. Good because he is a strong politican. Bad because if he ever cocks up big style he could split the party. And no politician, however effective, is infallible.
Complain about this comment
157. enneffess
"Try and apportion some blame to the SNP strategy."
That there were errors in the SNP campaign has never been denied. However much some here like to insist that it has. But they were minor errors relative to to the campaign as a whole. And, as has been noted, the campaign was subject to massive forces totally outwith the party's control. To say that the SNP should have had a better strategy is a bit like saying they should have had better weather.
Complain about this comment
159. GrassyKnollington
"I confess I found "more nats less cuts " to be truly dire. I winced every time I heard it."
That is my main criticism. The "champions" theme should have been better developed with a focus on priorities rather than "less cuts".
Complain about this comment
158. EH agreed! but then who could hope to compete with Iain "Elmer Fudd" Gray, the Bill Clinton of Tranent.
Half man, half saliva.
Complain about this comment
157. enneffess Try and apportion some blame to the SNP strategy.
The SNP could have chosen to expose the illegitimacy of the so-called leaders' debates by refusing to participate from the beginning. That way the party could have campaigned against the damage that the "presidentialisation" of British politics was wreaking on democratic fairness and representation. It could also have shown how this process was in the interests of the Unionist parties, who wish to concentrate power in Westminster. The SNP could then have allied itself with other excluded parties like the Greens. The party would then have been able to take the moral high ground in the debate around constitutional and political reform. Yes, the SNP would still have suffered from media bias, but that was always going to happen anyway.
Instead the SNP had counteract media bias whilst at the same time it had to continually deflect the entirely predictable criticisms that it was all about Alex Salmond and his ego. That happened because the SNP decided to go along with the leaders' debates idea, and demanded the inclusion of their own leader - thus implicitly agreeing with the presidentialisation of politics, and giving the media and the Unionist parties an excuse (as if they needed an excuse) to attack Salmond personally.
By demanding their own participation, but being quite happy to see the Greens and the Scottish Socialists etc. excluded, the SNP was unable to take the moral high ground and could not mount an effective campaign centring on democratic and political reform. The SNP just showed themselves to be as grubby in their self-interest as the other three parties. That strategy was the SNP's own choice, and in retrospect it was the wrong choice.
Ain't hindsight wonderful?
Complain about this comment
160. enneffess
"Alex Salmond IS the SNP to many people..."
Such is the nature of politics. We may not like it, but there is little we can do to change it. If the SNP could combine Salmond's nous with the charisma of some of the lesser political animals in the zoo, he would be the spin-doctor's dream. Me? I'll take him as he is. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of politicians I trust to any extent at all. Salmond is top of the heap. If for no other reason than that he doesn't need to be where he is, Who can doubt that, had he thrown in his lot with Labour, he would be Prime Minister of the UK by now.
Complain about this comment
#87 GrassyKnollington
"Rumour has it Brownedov tried to come back too but he was found to have a red beard and turned back at the logging on stage."
Turned off would be more apposite, GK. Calling a spade an entrenching tool is not my forte. oldnat made a reasonable point that appropriate language usage changes over time, but the current internecine struggle seems worringly New Labour. Fortunately, there's time to kiss and make up well before ballots are cast in 2011.
Complain about this comment
112. NorthernSole
Now to my point! 8-)
So I put my small brain into gear and determined to try to ascertain what might be happening, as regards the reception by voters, by and large, of independence.
As a total neutral (I'm not!), or an undecided, probably quite uninterested in politicians and politics, of whom there are great numbers, who can all vote, I figured my first encounter with independence as a proposition is its image, the stereotype.
So I tried to use those eyes and see how it's coming across. Not good is the answer.
It's stuck in the past, fanatical, disproportionately reactive, unrealistic, fantasy, over the top, ill conceived, unproven and consequently embarrassing. 'Fraid so.
Add to this that those that 'peddle' it 'are' whinging, highly strung, unrealistic, bitter, raving, pretentious, het up dreamers and stuck on the past. It doesn't yet connect with voters.
I had 'beleived' if you like that the media was the baddie in portraying and perpetrating this misrepresentaion, after all, I'm not like that. And I hadn't reckoned there were many that are. But I'll come to that. While it's clear that the media don't do independence supporters any favours much, and can be accused of willfully misrepreprentig us at times, I'm afraid they didn't make it up.
No, the stereotype was 'created' back in the days when there were 'nationalists' who did such a naive job of portraying themselves and their case that they came across like that, just as much as others perceived them like that. (Just as English nationalists today come across as rather unreasonably bitter and bigoted.)
Of course it's not all the media's fault. They do what they do, they have vested interests, yes. But if they are going to use whatever tactics are at their disposal to futher those, or prevent what they dislike, then of course they are going to pick up on the 'nationalist' stereotype, and reinforce it.
It's actually the most effetive way of denying power or rights to a group you don't want to have them. Look at the portrayal by religious groups of GLBT in the US, and elsewhere - the case in Malawi... I think it's the biggest problem facing indepndence today - I think the media question is valid also, and certainly a big problem, but also a distraction. We must look critically at ourselves, I mean as a group. Blaming the media too easily negates the need to do this. A mistake.
(cont.)
Complain about this comment
112. NorthernSole
Had we been independent and in the Euro we would not have control over our public finances to the extent we have just now. Accepting that devaluation is in effect another pay later scheme, as is quantitative easing, the reality is that the public really just see the differences on the ground.
I think the first part of that becomes lumped in along with the 'what ifs' if we were independent. Similarly, we can't see what would have happened if the UK, or Scotland, had been in the Euro, we can just guess. So, while now it seems quite pertinent to the debate, it fades off, and voters remain disconnected with it.
I agree with "the public really just see the differences on the ground". They need to see any change as less worse than their present circumstances before they'll support it.
Complain about this comment
166. Barbazenzero
"the current internecine struggle seems worringly New Labour"
That's a rather unexpected and shallow assessment, I think, if I may say.
I keep assuming people I respected were smart.
Complain about this comment
#165 EH
Yup, he would. More importantly, he answers only to the voters of Scotland. He doesn't need to chase votes in Middle-England and he doesn't have to propose 2 different policies on the same topic. This is true of Salmond and it is true of all SNP leaders.
Salmond has raised the bar for party leaders and First Ministers. Love him or loathe him, when our future political leaders have a moment of quiet reflection they will desire to match him. Unless of course they are too thick to realise how he has changed the game. No more tea-boys.
Complain about this comment
167. eye_write
(cont.)
If we don't 1) recognise and 2) improve our image, then the game is as good as lost, I'd say. If the public can't get past our poor image, then they are never going to reconcile anything we say to them with an open ear. We lose.
It is really as pivotal as that.
Complain about this comment
171. eye_write
We need to be conscious of our stereotype, and consciously avoid backing it up and playing into the hands of our detractors - why help them?
Complain about this comment
166. Barbazenzero
PS Much as I deplored Bliar, New Labout got elected - and massively.
Complain about this comment
172. eye_write
For example, Grassy's 87's...
vaults fearlessly into Brian's blog crying "Scotland!"
...while accepted it's all humour, demonstrates still the corn and cheese with which we will be represented if we don't show responsibility that we a) know about this preconception, and b) we are mature enough to deal with it.
Pretending it doesn't exist or blaming it on the others that hold it is not an option.
Complain about this comment
#169 eye_write
"That's a rather unexpected and shallow assessment, I think, if I may say."
Think and say what you like within the house rules. Political debate was ever robust until the era of political correctness ushered in by the late Vicar of St. Albions. I for one do not think the experiment an unalloyed success.
Complain about this comment
Having a debate and discussion is exciting and entertaining, at least it is for political wonks like us.
However if you support a particular political party, the place to criticise it and effect change is at your local branch not on a public forum, unless of course you are a troll.
Challenging your opponents however is what this forum is for.
Complain about this comment
To all of you who have denegrated Alex Slamond I think he is a politician of real substance and in my opinion history will speak for itself.
At least Alex speaks his mind and has the coutrage of his convictions which is more than can be said for most of the numpties we elect and complain when it all goes pear shaped.
It's a pity the Scottish nation don't want to stand up and fight for themselves but will just accept whatever the clowns south of the border dish out.
I have never been an out and out nationalist but am slowly coming round to the idea that if we want to survive as a nation we will have to go our own way.
Complain about this comment
177 Ziggy
Some may call him the Sayer!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2o2kdd_Veo
Complain about this comment
164. InfrequentAllele2:
I think you have perfectly summed up where things went wrong. What did not help their cause, and constantly highlighted by the media, was that while Alex Salmond is leader of the SNP, he was not standing at Westminster, and by demanding his presence brought in the "presidential" debate as you pointed out.
The Welsh refused to take part in legal proceedings, and with hindsight probably felt they would be sidelined by Salmond.
Coalitions rarely work properly, usually because each party - or certainly some of their members - have their own agenda. Look at Charles Kennedy, who has just shafted any hope of him ever becoming leader of the Lib Dems again. Didn't want to play with the Tories. The same for the Tory back benchers.
176. govanite:
People are entitled to criticise who they want publicly. The local branch of a political party will not entertain anyone unless they join.
The advantage of public forums like these - and they are looked at by political researchers - is that they gain vital information at little cost to themselves. Only a minority of the public are members of political parties. The problem with local branches is people start looking inwards rather than outwards for solutions. You will also get less criticism within and this is how politicians "lose touch".
Even hustings are controlled to an extent, and in my constituency the main candidates - SNP, Labour and Tories - even failed to turn up at one drawing massive criticism. Only the Tory candidate bothered to give an explaination. So public criticism is essential, provided it is not abusive and not biased by the media.
Complain about this comment
Ron MCArthur
Actually the West Lothian question does raise its head in this Parliament
Why should an MP from an English Constituency vote for Legislation that affects only Scotland
Somehoe that is OK, but not the other way about, never understood that
Complain about this comment
166. Barbazenzero
"oldnat made a reasonable point that appropriate language usage changes over time"
Interesting that. You will recall, oldnat's answer to amicusalba here and mine here and his/her reply to oldnat here.
I'm not bashing oldnat at all, of course he posses hindsight, but his initial rubbishing of claims that inappropriate language was used by some of the independence supporters on the blog, first pointed out by myself and then agreed with, and subsequently then proved, by amicusalba in his response, influenced the subsequent tone of the debate it can be shown.
Such are humans. I mean his non-endorsement of a point meant it was taken much less seriously, and other posters appeared, who were not on my side. Whereas when he later backs up the very same point, the tone of the blog changed, and later other posters appeared, who were on my side. Such is his influence through the respect he commands on this blog I suppose.
That paragraph isn't 'soor grapes', too old for that!, just an plain academic assessment of a situation. It is an exercise in how subjective responses to others can be. I only just reckoned on it now. I didn't think it was fair to be so belittled and dismissed, initially, as I was, in a post alongside GrannieAnne. Looking back, my case I think was effectively lost for as long as it wasn't being 'officially' backed up, regardless, from then.
It's not nice not to be judged on the integrity of what you've said, and instead be assumed to be an idiot, I found out. I'm not, and I don't. And we shouldn't do it to those who disagree with or misunderstand independence either.
BTW, I take on the chin any criticism of my style as it developed a much less formal approach, as I don't deny it. I had alternative reasoning, to that which was being appreciated, behind it. But it is interesting, and revealing, to note how others can be.
Complain about this comment
175. Barbazenzero
Fair enough. Yes, on political debate, no revelation. I suppose I must take it as a blessing to have seen your cards :-(
Complain about this comment
176. govanite
"However if you support a particular political party, the place to criticise it and effect change is at your local branch not on a public forum, unless of course you are a troll."
As far as I'm aware those are not 'house rules' and as I see it a rather simplistic view of events in general.
Complain about this comment
176. govanite
"However if you support a particular political party, the place to criticise it and effect change is at your local branch not on a public forum"
But what about those of us who support a political principle (in my case Independence/Scottish autonomy - I'm not fussy about words) and see a particular party as a means to that end, and not an end in itself?
I really don't like the idea of having to be simply part of a machine, and parrot the party line. The real people that we ask to vote on our side of political debate don't think that way themselves.
One of my favourite quotes "We don't all agree on everything. I don't agree with myself on everything". (Rudy Giuliani)
Complain about this comment
176. govanite
"unless of course you are a troll."
Care to explain that point? Thanks.
Complain about this comment
" The war'ly race may riches chase,
An' riches still may fly them, O;
An' tho' at last they catch them fast,
Their hearts can ne'er enjoy them, O."
Complain about this comment
162. Electric Hermit
"159. GrassyKnollington
"I confess I found "more nats less cuts " to be truly dire. I winced every time I heard it."
That is my main criticism. The "champions" theme should have been better developed with a focus on priorities rather than "less cuts"."
My tuppence worth on this, if we're criticising, the "more nats, less cuts" at least had a ring to it, so it sounded like a good slogan even if it didn't sound like a good slogan! The "champions" was rather droopy and sounded a bit out of place and ill fitting and wet and...daft! My view :-)
Complain about this comment
181. eye_write
Interesting analysis, with which I wouldn't disagree - except I don't think it's "respect" for me, but much more a matter of age and gender.
I didn't want to think that you were right about the language of the 70s and had skipped over it. Not listening is an easy way out for all of us!
I may have been slow, but I got there in the end!
Complain about this comment
112. NorthernSole
"The election results were even more frightening when the Glasgow North and East results are considered in a wider context. These communities have been failed by every government in living memory of any colour. Yet they fail to grasp any idea of a different outcome, any idea of hope.
In Glasgow East they went back to what they trusted. They just don't buy the current vision."
They didn't buy that 'the current vision' could be successful in enough seats to matter in that election, I think. In seats where the SNP hadn't broken through before, at Westminster, those voters weren't going to risk it, especially in the context aswell of the threat of the Tories getting in. And Neil has a point, at 156, that Labour are known in the constituencies they win.
"This is a real failure to communicate a positive vision, to build trust and confidence in a different way. Much more work is needed to reach out and articulate what can be achieved to all areas of Scotland if sucess is to be achieved. There needs to be a clear strategy and it needs to change."
Yes, like in the same way as a policy manifesto, not with specialised treatment because it is for independence. Keep it as normal as possible. (I mean by looking at the wording, launch, etc.)
"Alex was right to use the first term to demonstrate competent government, this has largely been achieved. The party now needs to move to create and articulate a vision that can build consensus. My fear is that Alex is not the man to build consensus. At some point his time will be up as it is for all politicians. Perhaps the time is right for some change in direction if the goal is to be achieved."
Yes, unless he starts doing some of the things we need. Politicians can be deliberate in their approach aswell, so it is possible that he could.
Complain about this comment
111. kered
"There have been countless debates on this site about Independence however the reality is, that notion is no further forward than it was three years ago."
I agreee with much of what you say there. In other posts I have attempted to outline the problem and an approach to a solution - but you are right, we have to recognise the problem first.
"surely the proper function would be for all MSP's to have the big debate about the future progress of the process of Parliament."
Good sentiments. But I fear the three unionist parties at Holyrood might not want as much 'progression' as is necessary.
Complain about this comment
102. Ron McArthur
"I do agree with what you say and accept you have displayed a willingness to be open minded and give fair and reasonable comments.I have also noticed that you are a frequent target of the people I was was talking about. Big brother does not share the same open mindedness, keep up the good work."
Thanks.
Complain about this comment
188. oldnat
I'd only rarely came across it as an adult. Then I first spotted it, so as you couldn't really ignore it, on Facebook during this election campaign. I assume those comparatively young posters got their attitudes from their parents? I don't know. But I remember growing up back then and being aware and unhappy with the language that was bandied about. I refused to let my parents off with the derogatory slang word for black people for example, as I found it just too cringeworthy! So being the new generation then I had a different perspective. My advantage.
And then, I'll admit I was appalled by crass terms being used with reckless abandon by some new posters on here. And justifying it! I can see their being from a different time was a factor, but I just gave that little credibility as an excuse, expecting as I mistakenly do, if they are on my side, that they should all know better. But I did try being very reasonable, though as I said in #181, I'm sure now I was in a lose-lose situation. I wasn't expecting such cold remarks as I got off others but I suppose it did serve to show their true opinions, and I must be grateful for that!
"I may have been slow, but I got there in the end!"
Just publicly clarifying, I never said that!
Complain about this comment
#187 eye_write
"The 'champions' was rather droopy and sounded a bit out of place (...)"
Strange to relate, I agree. Even stranger to relate, the sovereignist Parti québécois was chuntering on about champions shortly before the SNP took up the theme.
The PQ leader, Pauline Marois, opened a conference on February 3rd with the following (in French):
"I dream of the Quebec of tomorrow as a state in which we have succeeded in being champions of the environment and sustainable development."
That's a pretty literal translation, though. A better one might be: the Quebec that I dream of is a state in which we have succeeded in championing the environment and sustainable development.
I have no idea whether this is where the SNP got the idea, though. Maybe, if we asked them, they would tell us.
Complain about this comment
177. ziggyboy
"To all of you who have denegrated Alex Slamond I think he is a politician of real substance and in my opinion history will speak for itself.
At least Alex speaks his mind and has the coutrage of his convictions which is more than can be said for most of the numpties we elect and complain when it all goes pear shaped.
It's a pity the Scottish nation don't want to stand up and fight for themselves but will just accept whatever the clowns south of the border dish out.
I have never been an out and out nationalist but am slowly coming round to the idea that if we want to survive as a nation we will have to go our own way.
"
I've been a nationalisst for quite a while but I certainly agree on your points. It is a shame that so few of us have chosen to stand up for our nation. Alex Salmond does and I admire him for that.
I am amazed and appalled when I see Scots blether on about how much we've benefited from the Union. I don't believe it for a minute. Yes, certain members of the elite benefited. The rest of us rarely did--although occasionally we got tossed the leavings.
Complain about this comment
Referendum apartheid?
Newsnet Scotland
Complain about this comment
ConDems views on referendum:
Referendum in Wales - OK
Local Referendum on anything where there is support for one - OK
Referendum on European changes - OK
Referendum on Scottish Constitutional change - Anathema.
Complain about this comment
My comments above relate to those among us who blether on about which party they support then proceed to criticise them in public. You have a right to criticise of course, its just that I question the claimed party loyalty of these individuals.
No party is infallible but I won't waste my energy attacking the SNP when the more serious issue is highlighting the failure of the unionists who have presided over economic decline in Scotland for generations yet have the gall to claim independence would be damaging. After the Thatcher recession, Major's recession and Brown's recession it is clear the union offers no guarantees on economic stability.
Complain about this comment
193. frankly francophone
As always, a very interesting post. Thanks. If true, your point demonstrates at least that the SNP are outward looking ;-)
But, "Strange to relate, I agree."
Why? (Do you mean you agree the slogan was strange for voters to relate to?)
Complain about this comment
197. govanite
Party loyalty? I think criticism can have a beneficial effect, it shows that party's voters are thinkers for a start (not sheep ;-).
I also think it is valid to analyse how our message on independence is coming acrosss. This forum is as good a place as any, to show us in a good light. I don't think mere constant derision of unionist posters is a good way to do that. (Not alleging you do.) No one of course is above criticism, least of all the messenger it seems.
Complain about this comment
Condemocrats how appropriate!
Complain about this comment
88. At 09:48am on 21 May 2010, eye_write wrote:
Did you really have a bet I 'wouldn't bite'??
Yes. Political discussion rules - see if grammar or spelling
is checked rather than arguement. Its not quite on the same
level as Godwin's law but its always worth checking.
As you rightly point out, you did not bite, it was Electic Hermit.
Complain about this comment
175. Barbazenzero
A last thought, Barbazenzero.
My 181 to you and oldnat's response showed I think that people can tend to respond to their perception of a person rather than address the validity of the content of that person's post/s - my point. If I had to be the fall girl to make that point, then fine - my pride, such as it wasn't, ignores all such related concern!
(No "Quite so, ma'am"s for me ;-)
It certainly showed who my friends weren't.
Complain about this comment
119. patchbruce
"the main problem for the SNP is they have not articulated a vision of what an independent Scotland would look like, what it could achieve"
Thanks for your thoughts. I think it's interesting that you should put it like that.
I get the impression that many an independence supporter 'believes' in independence.
I did. (I still support it.) It is an ideology, a vision, faith if you like.
People sometimes don't see that's how it is coming across - they're convinced their vision embodies logic for example i.e. their vision is so obvious.
However, here's where the problem lies. It's extremely difficult to 'convert' someone.
Likewise it is an occupational hazard to be ever so offended by 'non-believers'.
This religious-isation of independence is another reason why we aren't making the progress perhaps polling for the SNP would predict we should have and that we'd hoped.
This technique isn't working. And frustration is pointless unless channeled into analysis of the problem and finding a solution. After all we all want the same thing.
I think the practical and the 'definite' is the way to present. Many posters on here were very good at that. To all, when you think about the posters you like, think why.
We have to keep independence sounding realistic, I think, pathbruce. Use examples to create contrasts and bear in mind in it is a valid, and proven, mechanism for change for the better for our country. Like the proposals of voting reform being presented, largely via a movement south of the border (we have improved systems), to Westminster, i.e. independence is a practical proposal, I think.
Complain about this comment
180. RandomScot
"Why should an MP from an English Constituency vote for Legislation that affects only Scotland
Somehow that is OK, but not the other way about, never understood that"
Because, when expediency dictates, Scotland ceases to be Scotland and becomes Britain. But England is always both England and Britain.
Complain about this comment
201. Anagach
"88. At 09:48am on 21 May 2010, eye_write wrote:
Did you really have a bet I 'wouldn't bite'??"
Yes. Political discussion rules - see if grammar or spelling
is checked rather than arguement. Its not quite on the same
level as Godwin's law but its always worth checking.
As you rightly point out, you did not bite, it was Electic Hermit.
LOL :-D Good post!
You need to come up with a name for your new law ;-)
Complain about this comment
SCOTTISH BLOG:
Red tape 'killing fishing industry'. BBC News. 23:45 GMT, Friday, 21 May 2010 0:45 UK
Brian,
Bertie Armstrong, Chief Executive of the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation, presses once more the industry’s point of view by denigrating the professional scientists that underpin the survival of the industry.
Bad tactic. Putting the short-term economic returns of today’s workforce before the survival of stocks necessary to support future generations of Scottish fishermen is not in his members (or their family’s) best interests.
Bertie uses phrases like “shakey science” and “doom-laden scenario of environmentalists”. Bertie does not know what he doesn’t know – all he is aware of is what his members observe and catch returns/discard rates in the declared fishery records. The Fisheries Scientists know what Bertie does not know, they also know what it is they don’t yet know and they know how to find this out. They additionally know the long-term model outputs and the extent that these can be influenced by the survival-strength of new cohorts. They have the power to predict and they put confidence limits around their predictions. A confidence limit is NOT “shakey science” – it is the application of best practice.
Bertie seeks “a new management regime that recognizes the efforts and sacrifices made by our industry”.
Consider: Stocks have declined by (shall we say) 95% from their historically pre-exploited level. A 1million tonne fishery now yields only 50,000 tonnes - all small immature/first year mature, not the giant specimens of a generation ago. Science tells us to let the small fish grow on to reproduce for a few years to build back the stocks. Bertie wants his members to fish these small fish harder. Year on year fluctuations in cohort strength can give false promise on stock size resurgence, and Bertie’s “new management regime” risks wiping-out even more species as exploitable populations (functional extinction) across Scottish water and beyond.
Geoff.
Complain about this comment
#198 eye_write
"Do you mean you agree the slogan was strange for voters to relate to?"
Clearly, a slogan works well only if it hits the nail on the head. For that to happen the language used has to be unambiguous and also to come from everyday speech. That is why the 'more nats, less cuts' one works better, I think, despite the grammatical infelicity, not that I care for it even so.
A slick slogan is not a slack slogan. It is as tight as tight can be.
On the point about the SNP being outward looking, that is what I would expect.
Complain about this comment
207. frankly francophone
Well, we were in agreement then. Interesting that I felt the need for verification.
Complain about this comment
207. frankly francophone
"On the point about the SNP being outward looking, that is what I would expect."
Yes but the point I was making was that that is not what others expect. Your expectations were beyond doubt. Not so, it seems, mine. (How long have we been talking on this blog...?)
Complain about this comment
158. At 9:21pm on 21 May 2010, Electric Hermit wrote:
155. GrassyKnollington
"They hope people are dim enough to buy into their suggestion that it's all a personality cult built around the First Minister..."
That raised a smile. Was there ever a more unlikely candidate to be at the centre of a personality cult?
Think back. Scottish Election 2007 - could you vote for the SNP on your regional list?
I couldn't, but there was a part called Alex Salmond for First Minister.
This does back up the idea that Alex Salmond is the SNP, and they seem(ed) quite happy to perpetuate this idea
Complain about this comment
210. SwanJon
"Think back. Scottish Election 2007 - could you vote for the SNP on your regional list?
I couldn't, but there was a part called Alex Salmond for First Minister.
This does back up the idea that Alex Salmond is the SNP, and they seem(ed) quite happy to perpetuate this idea"
Don't get carried away. This was merely a device to get the SNP to the top of the ballot paper. Needless to say the "Scottish" Labour Party cried foul. Which is characteristically hypocritical given that there is no such party. Like "Alex Salmond for First Minister", it is merely a registered description. But the latter has the saving grace of being honest. People actually were voting to make Alex Salmond First Minister. They were being deceived if they thought they were voting for a "Scottish" Labour Party.
Complain about this comment
206. GeoffWard
You don't get the picture.
Scottish fishermen are at the forefront of fish stock preservation. It was successive tory and labour policy that destroyed Scotlands fishing industry.
Scotland has the largest fishery in Europe yet when talks are held in Europe Scotland is denied a voice.
At the last decimation of Scotlands fishing industry Scotland was the only country that was ordered to decomission most of it's fleet. Other fishing nations were given grants to modernise theirs.
Spain is the main culprit in catching undersized fish yet they are given freedom of our waters whilst our fleet is ordered to tie up. Denmark is given total exploitation rights to Scotlands sand eel grounds and with their industrial fishing methods they are responsible for destroying the main link in the food chain for all fish species.
Another culprit in the reduction of fish stocks is the failure to implement a sustainable seal cull. Seals are like foxes in a coup. They will kill an entire shoal of fish to eat one.
I see seals near me that are emaciated because there is no fish left for them to catch. They are dying a slow painful death because of those do gooders who come on the telly pretending they are in some way protecting the species.
Give us our fishing industry back. Give us our 6000 square miles of Scottish territorial waters that Westminster illegally stole from the Scottish people. Give us the right to implement a seal cull programme and we can have an industry that is sustainable for fishermen, for fish stocks, and for seals.
Complain about this comment
Richard Baker the Labour justice person really is not the sharpest tool in the toolbox, today commenting on the Tesco backing for minimum alcohol pricing said radical steps were needed to tackle the national disgrace of Scotland's hard drinking. Well Richard unless there is a problem with alcoholism in kids under four years old or you are claiming three years of an SNP government has driven the nation to drink, then this problem has developed under years of Labour misrule, and where are the problems greatest? Yes the Labour heartlands, so what has your party done to solve the problem over the fifty years of Labour domination?
He cant help being ignorant but does he have to speak publicly to confirm it?
Complain about this comment
108
what you are saying is that Police priorities should be set in Edinburgh as they pay the piper as you put it.
No what I am saying is that police priorities are set in Edinburgh, MSPS campaign on the issue of law and order, and the Justice secretary has responsibility for policing in Scotland.
It is bad enough to have Westminster hopefuls campaigning on issues such as knife crime, but if Holyrood is to have no say over the affairs of Grampian police then it should be the Grampian area's councillors who campaign on the matter and those councils that provide funding.
if applied to other council functions such as education and social work it would mean more for Edinburgh and Glasgow and less for rural Scotland.
Education priorities are set nationally by Edinburgh, the council is responsible for provision of that service. The teenagers of Strathclyde are sitting the same exams as those in Grampian or Fife.
It is amusing that independence and devolvement of power is good in Holyrood but bad everywhere else. Amazing you can't see the obvious contradiction.
To borrow from Frankly Francophone you are mistaking observation with advocation. I also can't see a contradiction that does not exist, I have not said I disagree with greater powers being devolved to the regions, what I have said is that if power is to be devolved then so should fiscal and political responsibility (again, I'm not questioning individual officer's operational responsibility) and that if a council chooses to abrogate that responsibility, then Holyrood should be in a position to reclaim control over those services.
I am opposed to privatisation, not regionalisation.
Complain about this comment
213. peteraberdeenshire
"Richard Baker the Labour justice person really is not the sharpest tool in the toolbox..."
The Tories aren't any smarter. Their health spokesman, Murdo Fraser, demonstrated all too clearly his complete failure to understand minimum pricing when he said: “Tesco’s support for the SNP’s plans for indiscriminate blanket minimum pricing is unsurprising given that this would boost their own profits.”
The whole point of minimum pricing is, of course, that it is neither "indiscriminate" nor "blanket". But such idiocy is the inevitable consequence of opposing a policy for party political rather than rational reasons.
Complain about this comment
211. At 1:12pm on 22 May 2010, Electric Hermit wrote:
People actually were voting to make Alex Salmond First Minister. They were being deceived if they thought they were voting for a "Scottish" Labour Party.
Actually, they were voting for a regional MSP from party lists.
That's how the system works.
You demean every SNP list MSP by saying that none of their votes were actually for them, only for their party leader.
You seem to be slipping into the presidential way of thinking.
Complain about this comment
212. At 1:20pm on 22 May 2010, Harry Stottle wrote:
206. GeoffWard - "You don't get the picture.
Scottish fishermen are at the forefront of fish stock preservation. It was successive tory and labour policy that destroyed Scotland’s fishing industry.
Scotland has the largest fishery in Europe yet when talks are held in Europe Scotland is denied a voice.
At the last decimation of Scotland’s fishing industry Scotland was the only country that was ordered to decommission most of it's fleet. Other fishing nations were given grants to modernise theirs.
Spain is the main culprit in catching undersized fish yet they are given freedom of our waters whilst our fleet is ordered to tie up. Denmark is given total exploitation rights to Scotlands sand eel grounds and with their industrial fishing methods they are responsible for destroying the main link in the food chain for all fish species.
Another culprit in the reduction of fish stocks is the failure to implement a sustainable seal cull. Seals are like foxes in a coup. They will kill an entire shoal of fish to eat one.
I see seals near me that are emaciated because there is no fish left for them to catch. They are dying a slow painful death because of those do gooders who come on the telly pretending they are in some way protecting the species.
Give us our fishing industry back. Give us our 6000 square miles of Scottish territorial waters that Westminster illegally stole from the Scottish people. Give us the right to implement a seal cull programme and we can have an industry that is sustainable for fishermen, for fish stocks, and for seals."
-----------------------------
Dear Harry,
“Scottish fishermen are at the forefront of fish stock preservation” – also at the forefront of stock removal.
Yes, and there are other countries that are arguably ‘worse’ – and I agree about Spain, Denmark, and (historically) Klondyke Russians. Additionally, the black economy of undeclared landings, landing undersized and ‘illegal’ species in non-monitored ports is not just a problem on the continent, as you know.
I also hear you wrt seal culling. A starving seal is a sign of lack of fish – this reinforces my argument.
Your central argument is one of stock/geographical fishery ‘ownership’. The ownership is vested in the EU, with preferential rights of access accorded to the coastal ‘nation’ (in the case of Scotland) and historic patterns of exploitation. You have two strands to your argument:
(i) The EU controls your fishing practice, with negotiation between politicians, scientists and vying to preserve/exploit a common property resource, and trading fish against other interests.
(ii) Westminster has a policy hand on the negotiations and exploitation of waters that you think of as Scottish.
Two solutions:
(i) Remove the UK from the EU, (with all the trauma of unpicking treaties etc extending to all aspects of people’s lives in all Uk countries).
(ii) Remove Scotland from the Union and negotiate separate fishing restrictions with the EU Common Fisheries Policy group, (with all the trauma of reduction of income for all Scottish families, resulting from the loss of general subsidy from Westminster).
I fear that either of these solutions bring more and greater problems for Scotland. Your fishing fleet is one very small part of a much greater whole; and, having seen the total demise of the rest of the UK fishing fleet, I sympathise.
Complain about this comment
216. SwanJon
"Actually, they were voting for a regional MSP from party lists.
That's how the system works."
All of which would have the effect of making Alex Salmond First Minister.
And the stuff about demeaning list candidates is obvious nonsense since nobody was voting directly for any of them in any case. It made not the slightest difference to them what was on the ballot paper so long as the votes went to the SNP.
Complain about this comment
217. GeoffWard
"Remove Scotland from the Union and negotiate separate fishing restrictions with the EU Common Fisheries Policy group, (with all the trauma of reduction of income for all Scottish families, resulting from the loss of general subsidy from Westminster)."
Ah so we are an entire nation of spongers who do nothing but sit on our arses taking hand-outs from Westminster and we would starve if it were taken away.
Thank you for so plainly stating your opinion. I will now dismiss anything you say.
Complain about this comment
206. GeoffWard
"The Fisheries Scientists know what Bertie does not know, they also know what it is they don’t yet know and they know how to find this out. "
What magicians! They know what they don't know! Scientists know everything! Including about an industry that most of them know nothing and care nothing about!
PROVEN by the continued depletion of fishing stocks AFTER the destruction of Scotland's fishing industry and the suffering and death of seals after the end of culling.
Wonderful.
Complain about this comment
219. GrannieAnne
Ah, my. Was there ever such a nation as us? Not only are we too wee, too poor and too stupid, we are also too lazy to be independent.
Complain about this comment
By the way, I would be interested in someone who denies that Scotland is a colony which has an indigenous population to come up with a legal defense for independence. Because if these terms do not apply--we don't have one.
There is no legal defense for a region arbitrarily breaking off from a nation it forms a part of. You might want to re-think your constant attacks on people who express the legal underpinnings nationalism and independence. If we are not a nation which has been taken over by a foreign power, we have no right to independence.
Complain about this comment
Oh, GrannieAnne, what to do with you! (219, 220, 221). Scotland is not, as you put it, peopled by the tiny, poor, stupid and lazy.
But Scotland IS a small nation with big distances between small communities - the cost per person of fulfilling a Government's obligation to the people is proportionately higher. Scotland has also decided for itself to subsidise more - viz. university fees. It WILL cost more to go it alone - you know this, Westminster knows this, the EU knows this, and all parties in the Scottish Parliament know this.
However, if you decide to go down this route, many will support you (for better or for worse).
........
"What magicians! They know what they don't know! Scientists know everything! Including about an industry that most of them know nothing and care nothing about!"
Wrt to the specific issue of knowing what you need to find out to answer a complex question - the rigour of analysis demands arriving at an understanding of what research needs to be done, on what, in what time-scale, and to what degree of accuracy/what degree of accuracy is achievable [This is called 'Knowing What You Don't Know'].
Wrt the Fisheries Scientists knowing nothing about the industry and caring about it not at all. I have spent a university lifetime as a fisheries scientist, aware of the commitment of the Torrey team in Aberdeen, the Lowestoft team in England and the CFP negotiating Scientific Team driven to frustration at the sight of political trade-offs, administrative 'convenience', and outright lack of care for the science and the industry.
Don't talk to ME about lack of care.
Complain about this comment
222. GrannieAnne
To quote your type of phrase, "Rubbish", GrannieAnne. Your post is an absolute embarrassment. The UN states that a group that can be shown to have a history of being a nation, can exercise its right to self determination. It has nothing to do with 'colonisation'. You are living in a fantasy land fighting enemies that don't exist.
Complain about this comment
219. GrannieAnne
220. GrannieAnne
221. GrannieAnne
ref 223. GeoffWard
Well done for so eloquently and successfully stating our case there, GrannieAnne.
Now GeoffWard has a much more credible argument than he did.
"What to do with you" indeed....
Complain about this comment
(In case my 224 never leaves moderation purgatory....)
222. GrannieAnne
"If we are not a nation which has been taken over by a foreign power, we have no right to independence."
To use your type of favoured phrase, "Rubbish", Grannie Anne. Your post is an absolute embarrassment. The UN states that any group who can demonstrate they have a history of being a nation, can exercise their right to self determination. It is not determined by current borders and has nothing to do with colonisation. You are fighting battles against enemies that don't exist.
Unhelpful.
Complain about this comment
223. GeoffWard
"Oh, GrannieAnne, what to do with you! (219, 220, 221). Scotland is not, as you put it, peopled by the tiny, poor, stupid and lazy.
But Scotland IS a small nation with big distances between small communities - the cost per person of fulfilling a Government's obligation to the people is proportionately higher. Scotland has also decided for itself to subsidise more - viz. university fees. It WILL cost more to go it alone - you know this, Westminster knows this, the EU knows this, and all parties in the Scottish Parliament know this.
However, if you decide to go down this route, many will support you (for better or for worse).
........
"What magicians! They know what they don't know! Scientists know everything! Including about an industry that most of them know nothing and care nothing about!"
Wrt to the specific issue of knowing what you need to find out to answer a complex question - the rigour of analysis demands arriving at an understanding of what research needs to be done, on what, in what time-scale, and to what degree of accuracy/what degree of accuracy is achievable [This is called 'Knowing What You Don't Know'].
Wrt the Fisheries Scientists knowing nothing about the industry and caring about it not at all. I have spent a university lifetime as a fisheries scientist, aware of the commitment of the Torrey team in Aberdeen, the Lowestoft team in England and the CFP negotiating Scientific Team driven to frustration at the sight of political trade-offs, administrative 'convenience', and outright lack of care for the science and the industry.
Don't talk to ME about lack of care."
It will cost "more... More than what? More is meaningless except in comparison with something else. Did you say you were a scientist. What sloppy language for a scientist.
what to do with you!
I will give you one point as correct: I would prefer to eat Scottish mud than English gold and would count it as better.
I note that you can't bring yourself to even type the word "wee" and had to laugh. There are nations much more wee than Scotland that manage to get along pretty well, including some that share our values of caring for our people. You might want to explain how impossible that is to Norway.
Yes, the rigour of research does require finding out what needs to be learned.
Your "rigour" seems to be pretty darn willing to ignore that the Scottish fleet was not a "small part" because we always had the major part of the UK fishing industry which is why the politicians were so willing to sell it out.
Yes, "The ownership is vested in the EU..." This became the case after the UK politicians used the Scottish fishing industry as a bargaining chip and sold us out.
You are right about another point: "Westminster has a policy hand on the negotiations and exploitation of waters that you think of as Scottish."
Ah, we only think of them as ours. They aren't really ours, of course since our waters aren't really ours. However, it happens that legally we do still have some interest in those waters.
And Westminster neither knows nor cares about the good of those waters. They are still nothing more than something to be exploited for the benefit of Westminster and with NO regard for the good of Scots and Scotland.
I had to laugh yet again at this: "I have spent a university lifetime as a fisheries scientist, aware of the commitment of the Torrey team in Aberdeen, the Lowestoft team in England and the CFP negotiating Scientific Team driven to frustration at the sight of political trade-offs, administrative 'convenience', and outright lack of care for the science and the industry...."
Which you regard as an argument for leaving those in the totally non-caring hands of Westminster.
On the contrary, my very rigous researcher. The logical conclusion from THAT is that we need to get Westminster's hands off our nation's waters and the rest of our assets--while we yet have at least a few to be used. Because the way they waste them, that may not last much longer.
As far your caring so much, not a single one of your arguments has shown the slightest concern about Scottish interests. On the contrary, your argument (beyond that we are too wee, too poor, too stupid and too lazy) is that our interests do not exist.
Complain about this comment
226. eye_write
"Your post is an absolute embarrassment. The UN states that any group who can demonstrate they have a history of being a nation, can exercise their right to self determination."
According to your arguments we have been a voluntary slice of the UK and we only have decided to "be a nation" when it was no longer profitable to be part of the UK.
You can't have it both ways.
Complain about this comment
224. eye_write
"It has nothing to do with 'colonisation'. "
On the contrary, it very much does. The definition of a colony is "A region politically controlled by a distant country"
If Westminster is not distant from you, I assure you that it is from me.
Complain about this comment
225. eye_write
""What to do with you" indeed....
"
Actually, I'll as that quesstion right back at you. What to do with someone who is so rude, so determined to respect no one's opinion but their own, and so determined to rubbish anyone of a differing opinion.
What a horrid impression you give of the SNP.
I thank God you are not typical of that political party.
Complain about this comment
228. GrannieAnne
"According to your arguments we have been a voluntary slice of the UK and we only have decided to "be a nation" when it was no longer profitable to be part of the UK."
Portions of a nation do NOT have the right to succeed under the UK. Thus if we do not have an indigenous population and voluntaril became a part of the UK--we have no such right.
Complain about this comment
231. GrannieAnne
"under the UK"
... under the UN. (typo)
Complain about this comment
232. GrannieAnne
LOL
Go and read the UN Charter, GrannieAnne. And stop putting words in my mouth 'til you can sort out the ones in your own (amidst all the foam :-)
Complain about this comment
229. GrannieAnne
Parochial, GrannieAnne.
Complain about this comment
230. GrannieAnne
"Actually, I'll as that quesstion right back at you. What to do with someone who is so rude, so determined to respect no one's opinion but their own, and so determined to rubbish anyone of a differing opinion.
What a horrid impression you give of the SNP.
I thank God you are not typical of that political party."
It's considered insane to start talking to yourself by the way.
But I'll kindly do you a favour...
"Anglophone? Yes, this is GrannieAnne. I was looking for an argument......" 8-)
PS No, the SNP aren't looking for frustrated shortbread tin rattlers!
Complain about this comment
Welcome to the GrannieAnti & eye_sore show!
Complain about this comment
236. Electric Hermit
LOL! We should never canvass (or bake fairy cakes) together. ;-)
Complain about this comment
217. GeoffWard:
You are correct on the fishing issues - the only way we can protect the fishing industry of Scotland is to come out of Europe. It is as simple as that. Being independent within Europe will not change a thing.
grannie - you really do not have a clue about the problems with the fishing industry, you really do not. Europe is the problem, not the Westminister government, and I haven't seen much action by the Scottish Government either, because they know there is little they can do.
You #219 comment is total mince as well. If Scotland went independent it would still require some sort of handout from the EU, at least in the short term. You seem to be of the mindset that the day after independence all the problems will be solved. This is not a "too wee" argument, but reality.
Complain about this comment
"Hello, sorry to disturb you. I was just wondering if you were going to be voting SNP at the election? Right.
Well, do you know we are colonised?
Yes, the Englanders...it's a very bad problem..."
8-)
Complain about this comment
238. enneffess
'because they know there is little they can do.'
Every other fishing country bar none got a good deal. Why was it only Scotlands fishing industry that was sent to the slaughter.
Why does wasteminster send idiots who don't know one end of a fish from another to represent 'our' interests. Why does wasteminster deliberately block people who are in the loop with regards to Scotlands fishing industry from attending talks.
Heath sacrifised Scottiash jobs for concessions when we joined Europe.
Blair and Brown sacrificed Scottish fishing jobs because it fitted in with their scorched earth policy north of the border. (remember labour MP's whooping and punching the air with delight when they destroyed Scotlands banking industry)
As for someone like Geoff who tells us he is a scientist, a product of academia, and then comes away with absurd comments about England subsidising Scotland just proves he is a fake or a troll.
Complain about this comment
240. Harry Stottle
"Every other fishing country bar none got a good deal. Why was it only Scotlands fishing industry that was sent to the slaughter.
Why does wasteminster send idiots who don't know one end of a fish from another to represent 'our' interests. Why does wasteminster deliberately block people who are in the loop with regards to Scotlands fishing industry from attending talks."
You speak the truth. But the fact is that it goes beyond that they have, time after time, sacrificed Scotland's interests (as I am sure you would agree).
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....
Complain about this comment
222 GrannieAnne
By the way, I would be interested in someone who denies that Scotland is a colony which has an indigenous population to come up with a legal defense for independence. Because if these terms do not apply--we don't have one.
Nations have the right to self-determination. We are a nation which is a part of a (supposedly) democratic state along with with another couple of nations. Nations are sovereign, and can choose to be sovereign alone or to pool their sovereignty with other nations. Scotland is a nation because we had all the attributes of modern nationhood before we joined the Union, and because after the Union was formed we maintained most of them, thus preserving our sense of nationhood. In fact the preservation of most Scottish national institutions was guaranteed by the Treaty of Union. That's why modern Scotland has a civic nationalism, and not an ethnic one.
Oh, but you cry, we were taken into the Union against the will of the majority of Scottish people. Well I've got news for you. It happened in 1707, modern democracy hadn't been invented then. The vast majority of English people didn't get any say in the matter either. In the early 18th century all European states were run by and for the interests of a small unrepresentative elite. The problem with the British state is that it still is. That's why I want independence.
No one is saying Scotland doesn't have an "indigenous population" however that may be defined. The point that is being made is that the concept is irrelevant to Scotland's claim to self-determination, and that in modern European political discourse the term is most commonly associated with the extreme far-right - so using it makes you sound like a raving fascist.
Complain about this comment
238. enneffess
"If Scotland went independent it would still require some sort of handout from the EU, at least in the short term. You seem to be of the mindset that the day after independence all the problems will be solved. This is not a "too wee" argument, but reality.
"
Nonsense. ALL nations have problems. No one, EVER, has said that independence makes a land of milk and honey where there are no problems. But independent, WE get to decide whether or not to join the EU. WE get to decide how to negotiate--AND have a voice at the negotiations where now we have no voice.
How would you know that we would need a "hand-out" from the EU? We might well run a deficit for a while since most nations do, but we would also have the assets that would give us a good position for needed credit--so I VERY much doubt any need for a "hand-out". We get to set the priorities.
As far as my not knowing anything about fishing, you would know that--how? Right. You wouldn't.
Complain about this comment
242. InfrequentAllele2
Nonsense. The term indigenous population is used in all sorts of contexts including UN regulations. It has nothing to do with "far-right" politics and anyone who has paid any attention at all to my posts knows I am about as far from "far-right" as you can get. I am auite a bit left of the SNP.
No, portions of a nation are not allowed to just break-off willy-nilly under UN regulations. As far as how voluntary joining Great Britain was, I must suppose that army that was on our border at the time had nothing to do with it. The democracy argument is one you are putting in my mouth although the riots that took place at the time does hint that the treaty was widely opposed. However, one might well argue that both the bribery that took place and the threat from the English army (yes, it was English) invalidates such a treaty as it was not entered into freely by the existing parliament. Not an argument I make, but it could be made on a historical basis.
The argument has been made here time after time by Oldnat and eye-write that Scotland profited by joining itself to the UK (thus, although they prefer not to mention it, giving up their own nationhood) and only want independence because it is no longer profitable.
This is NOT a good argument for independence. It is certainly not one that would be accepted under international law. And what happens in a few years when it is no longer seen as PROFITABLE to be independent. What THEN becomes the argument of these supposed patriots?
Complain about this comment
'modern democracy hadn't been invented then'
Modern democracy began in 1320 with the signing of the Declaration of Arbroath which denounced the Divine Right of Kings and gave people the power to remove a monarch if they so wished.
Complain about this comment
Here we go the unionists telling us nationalists that we are far right for wanting independence or that Scotland needs financial help from all and sundry to be independent. These are the words of fear that keep our nation cowering in a state of poverty while our wealth is spirited away. Dear unionists please supply figures and facts to back up this scare mongering. In any case I personally don't care if i have to pay more tax, better to be free to decide how much we tax and spend than live in fear like timid mice and and beg at the table for more. Come on are you real Scots or are you mice?
Complain about this comment
242. InfrequentAllele2
"The problem with the British state is that it still is. That's why I want independence."
Ignoring you're putting silly "cries" in my mouth that I never once uttered, since I have not discussed until my last post the Act of Union...
A VERY poor reason to want independence. If you have no loyalty to Scotland as a nation, you would, frankly, do better to fight within the UK to try to make it democratic. While I certainly agree that it is not democratic, my desire for Scottish independence is because Scotland is a nation and the natural and desirable situation for nations is one in which they are independent and able to do the best for their people, not where the power to make decisions is outwith the nation and the decisions ignore the good of the people.
Complain about this comment
244. GrannieAnne
"The argument has been made here time after time by...eye-write that Scotland profited by joining itself to the UK (thus, although they prefer not to mention it, giving up their own nationhood) and only want independence because it is no longer profitable."
What?? Yep, certainly "raving". In which of your swirling frustrated reveries did you decide that?
Did you make it up so you could have a go at us? I think so.
What a great portrayal of a 'blind raving nat' - again.
Complain about this comment
247. GrannieAnne
GrannieAnne, this great big huff will not win us votes for independence.
Are you in fact a 'unionist troll'?
Complain about this comment
246. patchbruce
"In any case I personally don't care if i have to pay more tax, better to be free to decide how much we tax and spend than live in fear like timid mice and and beg at the table for more. Come on are you real Scots or are you mice?
"
Well put, sir. Well put.
Complain about this comment
248. eye_write
"What a great portrayal of a 'blind raving nat' - again.
C"
What a great portrayal of the concept of an ad hominem attack -- again.
Those are EXACTLY the arguments Oldnat put forward that we had profited from being in the UK and no longer do so and therefore he no longer believes in the Union--which posts you commented that you argreed with.
I reacted rather strongly, pointing out that only the elite in Scotland ever made such a profit. Those of us not of the elite got tossed the leavings in the past as still now.
Complain about this comment
249. eye_write
"Are you in fact a 'unionist troll'?"
Coming from someone who is likely to scare anyone who doesn't want to toe a party line from the SNP, that is fairly amusing.
Complain about this comment
248. eye_write
"What a great portrayal of a 'blind raving nat' - again.
"
Ir ia interesting. Who on this blog most often uses insulting terms toward nats? Who on this blog has said time after time that nats are racists? Who on this blog has made attack after attack on nationalists?
I really think that usually the accusations of someone pretending to be a nationalist in order to harm the SNP are over-blown, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.
Complain about this comment
245. Harry Stottle
But 1320 isn't really modern is it, things have changed a bit since then ;-)
On fishing. I, unlike GrannieAnne am not an expert, but feel that if, as alleged, under the current system, there is no chance of improvement within the EU (and I can see that argument), then I would rather give ourselves the chance of some chance, with Scottish delegates to the talks, not British. In a supposed 'no win' situation it would make sense to strengthen your hand as much as possible. We can't, as of course Scotland has no power, as it stands. Then we could see what happens.
Complain about this comment
252. GrannieAnne
It's amusing that you portray the epitomy of the worst kind of nat?
Read your history books GrannieAnne. In the Empire Scots looked after Scots, it is well known. They got onto the boards of trading companies in 'embarrassingly' high numbers, for rules were drawn up limiting this, they employed Scots, they used Scots lawyers to send money home to Scotland, benefitting numerous estates from Skye to the east across the land. Look at the statues and buildings. It irritated our neighbours at the time as we weren't playing for 'team Britain'. In much of India Scots more than the English were hated as the brutal colonial power. This has all been documented.
Don't tell me it's all rubbish - then you are rubbishing lecturers and historians who I think know better than you.
But it makes no difference to my view of independence. I look at today. I see what the arguments are for today. I don't need a list of historical gripes to bolster my opinion - I use my brain.
And you criticising InfrequentAllele2, that's what's funny.
Complain about this comment
251. GrannieAnne
"What a great portrayal of the concept of an ad hominem attack -- again. "
You deserve it! If you're going to spout madnat-bile-BS on the blog, take the flak.
Complain about this comment
251. GrannieAnne
Do you really think you're not a blind-raving-mad-nat?
And what's all this tripe about my bothersome 'adherence to the SNP party line'?
Do you want me to be a 'nat' or not? LOL
Complain about this comment
240.Harry Stottle:
Are you seriously telling me that Westminster deliberately screwed the Scottish Fishing industry? While Europe watched?
If that is the case, then Salmond has some explaining to do, since I cannot recall him pounding down the Industry secretary at the time.
The fishing industry kowtows to EU policy, not Westminster. The only way it can be rescued is by leaving the EU. And we can't do that yet, and economics would dictate otherwise. The Scottish Government will accept the fishing industry as a necessary casualty, even if we won't.
----------------------
246. patchbruce:
In case you haven't been keeping up with current affairs here, it is actually nationalists arguing with nationalists.
And your argument, if put to the people, would fall flat on its face.
Pay more tax to be free? Erm, I wasn't aware that we were somehow incarcerated. People will only accept higher taxes if there is a tangible benefit to them, and emotional arguments haven't done anything to push the independence argument so far.
You and others trot out the oft-used line that unionists think we are "too wee" etc. But you and others seemed to be wearing tartan knickers trapped inside the shortbread tin with a book of Burns poetry.
Why not try using modern examples, such as how the SNP are doing quite well as the government of Scotland?
Complain about this comment
251. GrannieAnne
"I reacted rather strongly, pointing out that only the elite in Scotland ever made such a profit. Those of us not of the elite got tossed the leavings in the past as still now."
That's imaginery rueing fom a psyche that is deperate to have some gripe in order to complain, and the bigger the better. Is it an attention thing? If we were already independent, would you have some big resistance match against Edinburgh, or Europe perhaps, or the next town, or next door neighbour, backed up by a list of quite passionately innaccurate wrongdoings?
Complain about this comment
246. patchbruce
"personally don't care if i have to pay more tax, better to be free to decide how much we tax and spend than live in fear like timid mice and and beg at the table for more."
If Scots had to pay more tax just for being independent, that would kind of kill the argument for independence, as surely we can run our own economy without so burdening ourselves tax-wise! If not, those unionists were right? ;-)
(They're not, of course.)
Complain about this comment
258. enneffess
"Why not try using modern examples, such as how the SNP are doing quite well as the government of Scotland?"
While that might counteract the argument the frequent "too stupid" argument that we are too stupid to run our own country (which I never bought in the first place) it is NOT an argument for independence.
In fact, there is no legitimate argument for portions of an existing nation to break away. The only argument is that the breakaway was always a nation in the first place.
Complain about this comment
261. GrannieAnne
That the independence supporting party is doing well in government is not an argument for independence? Do not go canvassing!
Complain about this comment
244. GrannieAnne
Nonsense. The term indigenous population is used in all sorts of contexts including UN regulations. It has nothing to do with "far-right" politics and anyone who has paid any attention at all to my posts knows I am about as far from "far-right" as you can get. I am auite a bit left of the SNP.
And the context we're in is the context of 21st century European politics. We're not native Americans or Australians. Google BNP and "indigenous population" and you'll get hundreds of quotes from nasty fascists mouthing off and using the phrase in their propaganda. I'm not posting links to fascist sites, so you'll have to do your own research.
I didn't say you were a fascist, I said that using the term indigenous population makes you sound like one. Since you're not a fascist, that's a good reason to stop using fascist terminology, isn't it.
No, portions of a nation are not allowed to just break-off willy-nilly under UN regulations.
We're not a portion of a nation. We are already a nation. Nation and state are not the same thing. We are not claiming the right to sovereignty, we are already a sovereign nation. Scotland is a sovereign nation which has pooled the exercise of its sovereignty with another nation with which it shares a Parliament. The continuing existence of Scottish nationhood, and hence sovereignty, was guaranteed by the Treaty of Union when it recognised and protected the independence of Scots Law, education and religion.
All of the mainstream Unionist parties acknowledge that Scotland has a right to self-determination, they're just not very keen on us exercising that right. The argument about Scottish independence is not an argument about whether Scotland has the right to sovereignty, it's an argument about what to do with Scottish sovereignty.
If you have no loyalty to Scotland as a nation, you would, frankly, do better to fight within the UK to try to make it democratic.
I believe that the UK is a lost cause. Scotland isn't. I'm terribly sorry that's not patriotic enough for you. But most of us aren't that patriotic.
245. Harry Stottle
Nice myth. But no. Peasants in 1320 didn't get much in the way of democratic choice, even if they were Scottish peasants. They did what the guys with the horses, the armour and the big swords told them to do. Modern democracy started in the late 18th century with the ideas which inspired the French and American revolutionaries.
246. patchbruce
If you use terminology associated with the far right, people will associate you with the far right. It may be unfair and not what you intended, but that's how human language works.
And I am not a unionist telling nationalists that they sound like fascists. I am a left wing supporter of Scottish independence who is telling some nationalists that they risk sounding like fascists. That's called friendly advice.
Complain about this comment
259. eye_write
"That's imaginery rueing fom a psyche that is deperate to have some gripe in order to complain, and the bigger the better. Is it an attention thing? If we were already independent, would you have some big resistance match against Edinburgh, or Europe perhaps, or the next town, or next door neighbour, backed up by a list of quite passionately innaccurate wrongdoings?"
Really. Do try to post rants that make at least minimal sense.
And oldnat's comments make it clear that it is not an opposition to being British which HE claims we were enthusiastic about or any loyalty to Scotland but that we supposedly no longer profit:
"Scots (as enthusiastic Brits at the time) were complicit in the exploitation of the British Empire and its peoples, just as much as other peoples of the UK. It ill becomes Scots to complain that the increasing centralisation of Government in London in the second half of the 20th century in any way relates to the colonial experience."
No one might seriously ask him how centralisation has increased. In fact, it has not. Power has been totally controlled by Westminster ever since 300 years ago far too many of our leaders (not all of them) decided they were tired of fighting for Scottish freedom and independence.
Complain about this comment
262. eye_write
No. It is an argument for voting for them at the next election as part of the UK. It gives NO reason why we would be better off independence.
As my granddaughter would say: Duh!
Complain about this comment
246. patchbruce
"In any case I personally don't care if i have to pay more tax, better to be free to decide how much we tax and spend than live in fear like timid mice and and beg at the table for more."
The very reason I tend to avoid the economic arguments around independence. For me, they are all but irrelevant. Self-determination is a fundamental democratic principle that rises above both economics and party politics.
Complain about this comment
I see 'anger nannie' talking out of her posterior yet again no wonder there are so many teachers on stress relief.
My fight for fish
We are on the tipping point of putting all marine life into terminal decline for the sake of global capitalism one takes ones choice financial wealth or food, time to leave the EU.
Complain about this comment
266. Electric Hermit
"The very reason I tend to avoid the economic arguments around independence. For me, they are all but irrelevant. Self-determination is a fundamental democratic principle that rises above both economics and party politics."
Exactly!
Do you see ANY of the nations that have gained independence in the last hundred or so years (and there have been many of them) crawling back and begging to be taken in by a larger nation? No.
All nations go through tough times. You stick it out.
Complain about this comment
263. InfrequentAllele2
"If you have no loyalty to Scotland as a nation, you would, frankly, do better to fight within the UK to try to make it democratic.
I believe that the UK is a lost cause. Scotland isn't. I'm terribly sorry that's not patriotic enough for you. But most of us aren't that patriotic. "
And what do you do if Scotland's government doesn't meet up with your expectations (which they won't)? What if we have to struggle to get it to go in the direction we want it to (which we will)? What if we have economic problems (which we will)?
Decide you want to be taken back?
I'm sorry but it takes a lot of determination to build a state, so it had better be something you are committed to. It isn't easier or more convenient and may well not be more profitable.
Complain about this comment
# 258
Can you put a price on managing your own affairs and doing what is right for your country?
I have never been one for dressing up in tartan, nor wrapping myself in our national flag. I have never been one for blaming Scotland's ills on England!
My ambition has been to reinstate Scotland's position as an independent sovereign Europen country, living in peace with its neighbours with a centre left government.
I for one am prepared to cough up additional tax to make this a reality!
C McK
Complain about this comment
270. Calum McKay
"My ambition has been to reinstate Scotland's position as an independent sovereign Europen country, living in peace with its neighbours with a centre left government.
I for one am prepared to cough up additional tax to make this a reality!"
There I totally agree.
Our motivations may be slightly different, but our aims are exactly the same.
Can you put a price on managing your own affairs and doing what is right for your country?
As well and simply put as I have ever seen it.
Complain about this comment
265. GrannieAnne
"As my granddaughter would say: Duh!"
Bet she says it a lot! LOL
Complain about this comment
264. GrannieAnne
Well, of course some were enthusiastic Brits! They were in the history books too.
So what was your post all about??!!!
(I thought posting in 'minimally sensible rant" was the language you understood! :-)
Complain about this comment
263. InfrequentAllele2
"All of the mainstream Unionist parties acknowledge that Scotland has a right to self-determination, they're just not very keen on us exercising that right. "
You might want to listen to a certain gentleman named Ian Hamilton QC:
Think on this.
Every political institution in Scotland has been created by the English Parliament. What it creates it can take away. This applies not only to Holyrood but to the whole framework of our local government. It applies to every function we hold jointly with England. They have the say. We have permission to agree.
We have just seen how it applies to the BBC. We are a democracy but the state broadcasting system elects to give a voice only to the Unionists. This is manifestly unfair. Yet the Court must administer the law as it is handed down from England. Our say is silence.
Do not think I exaggerate. The BBC is only one example. In a private debate on Calman I heard an English academic say blandly that the Scotland Act would be repealed if Scotland successfully insisted in an international court that it was Scotland’s oil. This would mean that Holyrood would cease to exist.
I'll link to that blog in the next comment just in case.
Complain about this comment
Says Ian Hamilton: We have permission to agree.
Complain about this comment
272. eye_write
"Bet she says it a lot! LOL"
My, my. Interesting how you avoid actually addressing the subject of debate. Now one wonders why that might be.
Complain about this comment
273. eye_write
"They were in the history books too.
So what was your post all about??!!!"
Ah, well, I won't bother with insulting your understanding since personal insults are the sign of someone who can't make an argument. I have someone on this blog who has proven that over and over.
What was my post all about? That the majority of Scots never became British and that the benefits of such Britishness was limited to some of the upper classes who did and do consider them such.
There. Hopefully that explains it sufficiently. That some profited does not tar the entire nation just as I refuse the contention that the fact that some wealthy shipping magnates in Glasgow profited by the slave trade made the entire nation of Scotland complicit and/or profit by that trade.
Most of us were never British.
Complain about this comment
263. InfrequentAllele2
"All of the mainstream Unionist parties acknowledge that Scotland has a right to self-determination"
If you can link to where any mainstream Unionist party has said Scotland has the right of self-determination, I would be interested in seeing it.
Complain about this comment
276. GrannieAnne
Your point that the elected independence supporting government in Holyrood doing well cannot be cited as 'a reason for independence', as you so simply and glibly put it, is wrong, in that it is seen as Scots 'running themselves', and offers some demonstration that we can, and voters see that link. Got it yet?
Complain about this comment
From Wikipedia (health warning as normal)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony
"In politics and in history, a colony is a territory under the immediate political control of a state. For colonies in antiquity, city-states would often found their own colonies. Some colonies were historically countries, while others were territories without definite statehood from their inception. The metropolitan state is the state that owns the colony. In Ancient Greece, the city that founded a colony was called the metropolis. Mother country is a reference to the metropolitan state from the point of view of citizens who live in its colony. There is a United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories.
"A colony is mostly ruled by another state or can be run independently. Unlike a puppet state or satellite state, a colony has no independent international representation, and its top-level administration is under direct control of the metropolitan state.
"The term "informal colony" is used by some historians to describe a country which is under the de facto control of another state, although this description is often contentious."
Complain about this comment
Oidhche mhath
Complain about this comment
270. Calum McKay
I actually do believe that if those on higher incomes would have to pay slightly more, as a result of the proposed local income tax for example, then it would be worth it as an investment in Scotland's future. (I wouldn't support a totally punitive tax regime, for it's an economically defunct argument. And neither of those things need go hand in hand with independence, of course.)
Complain about this comment
The Quislings keep using the the phrase 'The union dividend' but try as I might I cannot find any dividends or anything positive to say about this one sided farce.
I can only think of women and children being murdered as they are burnt out and cleared from their homes. I can think of Scots being disproportionately used as canon fodder to build another nations empire. I can think of theft of territory and plundering of natural resources which goes on to this very day. I can think of lying and deceit by our ruling classes to keep my nation subjugated and my people deliberately kept in penury. I can think of those who are supposed to report impartially on these and many more injustices decieving the people and instead paying homage to the Whore of Babylon, AKA the Palace of Westminster.
But I can also take hope from the growing number of people who are waking up to what's going on and who wish, like me, that we can soon throw off the shackles that have held us down for 300 years.
Complain about this comment
276. GrannieAnne
I think 'one wonders' a lot of things!
Complain about this comment
277. GrannieAnne
In your imagination to back up your gripe fest. Read more.
Complain about this comment
283. Harry Stottle
OMG! It doesn't relate to the modern world, Harry.
Complain about this comment
258. At 8:55pm on 22 May 2010, enneffess wrote:
to be wearing tartan knickers trapped inside the shortbread tin with a book of Burns poetry.
That's your big psychological fear isn't it, you think people like me would have you all wrapped in tartan. Yes I might live in the Southern highlands, i might even own a kilt but I'm a progressive businessman, who is presently trying to make inroads into a lucrative foreign market for the benefit of Scotland and there is not a kilt or box of Shortbread in sight. Nor have I ever quoted burns. Please check my previous posts.
I simply believe in my nation. I do not disrespect it at every turn like some. I just wish I had the ability to speak to the central belt and show them how the labour party have betrayed Scotland for 70 years.
263. At 9:27pm on 22 May 2010, InfrequentAllele2 wrote:If you use terminology associated with the far right, people will associate you with the far right. It may be unfair and not what you intended, but that's how human language works.
Unfortunately I do not think you can realistically avoid using such language if you are seeking your independence from another nation. To be patriotic is seen by the left as being right wing, look at England, the poor guys down there cant fly their St.Georges cross without being called racist.
Can imagine the french or Americans putting up with that rubbish!
I simply put Scotland and the Scottish first, publish and be damned I say.
Complain about this comment
251. GrannieAnne
"the arguments Oldnat put forward that we had profited from being in the UK and no longer do so and therefore he no longer believes in the Union"
In this glorious weather, I've had a lot better things to do than post on here. My garden is looking a lot better after spending the day in it.
Then, I come on here and see the garbage you have posted about what you imagine to be my views. I'm going to be generous and assume that you are simply ignorant of modern Scottish history, and not actually given to lying about other posters.
Just to clarify. I call myself "old" nat, but I am not actually old enough to have been alive when the Scottish economy benefited (not from the Union itself) through the Union gaining significantly from the exploitation of the colonies of the British Empire.
Have you ever been in Paisley, or Johnstone? Seen the decaying abandoned textile mills? All the jobs in them were created through buying cheap raw cotton from the colonies, and selling back expensive manufactured goods. That's what economic colonisation in the 19th century was about. That's why European powers fought wars over control of what we now call the Third World.
When I first moved to the West of Scotland, I went to a protest meeting about the closure of a textile mill here. There was fury among the workforce that their jobs were being lost because the Egyptians were spinning and weaving their own cloth from their own cotton and cutting out the colonial exploiters (the Ayrshire workforce). Did you really think that the Suez War was only about Egypt nationalising the Canal? The core of the conflict was the UK (including Scotland - and the economic interests of Scots) desperate to continue the economic dependence of Egypt on us, in our interests.
Only the ignorant (or the really stupid) imagine that Scots were anything other than really enthusiastic partners in the whole Empire project.
The Empire, however, was effectively gone by the time I was born. During my lifetime, Scotland has suffered by increasing centralisation of power and wealth in the South East of England. For the Brits that doesn't matter. They don't think of Scotland as a political and economic and legal unit. I do - so did my parents, who saw what was happening. My parents were Scots, and voted and petitioned continuously for Home Rule. The UK Union has been a significant disadvantage to Scotland since the mid 20th century. Time to end that Union.
I understand history. You live in a mythology of your own creation (or perhaps of someone else's creation - but certainly a mythology which bears little relation to historical reality).
Complain about this comment
279. eye_write
"Your point that the elected independence supporting government in Holyrood doing well cannot be cited as 'a reason for independence', as you so simply and glibly put it, is wrong, in that it is seen as Scots 'running themselves', and offers some demonstration that we can, and voters see that link. Got it yet?"
It offers some demonstration that we can run a government. It gives no reason for independence.
Got it yet?
Complain about this comment
286. eye_write
"OMG! It doesn't relate to the modern world, Harry."
I can think of theft of territory and plundering of natural resources which goes on to this very day. I can think of lying and deceit by our ruling classes to keep my nation subjugated and my people deliberately kept in penury. I can think of those who are supposed to report impartially on these and many more injustices decieving the people and instead paying homage to the Whore of Babylon, AKA the Palace of Westminster....
Sounds exactly like the modern world--if you care to open your eyes.
Complain about this comment
277. GrannieAnne
"Most of us were never British."
Actually, as the generations wore by, post Union, more Scots than had done did accept Britishness at that time. There was a definite shift then, and quite a snobbery by some Scots in fact. Was it opportunistic? You can read about it yourself. But you're right that the majority of ordinary Scots, as today, saw themselves as Scottish.
Complain about this comment
287. patchbruce
"publish and be damned I say"
Publish and catch the ear of voters I say.
Complain about this comment
264. GrannieAnne
"No one might seriously ask him how centralisation has increased. In fact, it has not. Power has been totally controlled by Westminster ever since 300 years ago far too many of our leaders (not all of them) decided they were tired of fighting for Scottish freedom and independence."
Are you totally ignorant of Scottish political history?
Try reading the Act of Union, and understanding it in the context of Government of that time. In terms of the early 18th century, the Scots political establishment was giving up control of defence and foreign policy in return for access to trade with the English Empire. This was the era of mercantalism (if you don't know what that means - go look it up).
All of what were then thought of as Scots domestic affairs were left totally in Scottish hands (again, if you don't understand the role of the Kirk and the Law in 18th century Scotland, go do some reading).
Most Scottish affairs did not require legislation (and the few that did were passed due to total disinterest by English MPs). It isn't till the late 19th century that Parliament started legislating on social issues, and the Scottish establishment forced the re-establishment of the post of SoS so that the Scottish way of doing things could continue.
That system carried on through until WWII. It was during the war that centralisation really kicked in. Just look at Churchill's plans for the redistribution of the workforce and the role of Tom Johnstone in resisting that.
If you don't understand the process of centralisation, and the importance of ideological positions determined by UK parties, on the basis of the situation in England from the 1950s onwards, then I and many others do. That imposition of alien ideologies on Scotland is what really created the demand for Home Rule - which eventually forced the UK to re-establish our Parliament.
The difference between our economic needs and those of the South East of England will, IMHO, mean that we will get fiscal autonomy in due course.
The final stage - defence, foreign affairs, macro-economics? Who knows? I'd be willing to share these functions in a wider Union - Scandinavia? the EU? let's see what Scotland's best options are at that stage. We are a sovereign people, but we can't impose our preferred international constitutional structure on the likes of Denmark - unless we go back to Imperialism again?
Complain about this comment
289. GrannieAnne
Do you think that we would not have to run our own government come independence?!!! What do you see happening come independence?
Complain about this comment
290. GrannieAnne
"Sounds exactly like the modern world--if you care to open your eyes."
("My") You'll say anything to try and win an argument?!
"my people deliberately kept in penury"
'penury'?
We do have poverty but we are not the Third World. Do you think we are as badly off as the Third World??
Complain about this comment
The coalition partnership agreement states: “We will give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any issue.”
So are the Tories and LDs going to support a referendum in Scotland on our constitutional future? Alas, I think that bit (like many) of their agreement applies to England only.
It is interesting that the Unionist parties are so fundamentally dishonest as to how few things (though they are big things) that Westminster actually controls in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
283. Harry Stottle
"paying homage to the Whore of Babylon"
Nice to see that your language is wholly in time with your thinking - any time in the 17th - 19th centuries?
Complain about this comment
295. eye_write
"We do have poverty but we are not the Third World. Do you think we are as badly off as the Third World?"
It's actually quite remarkable that some Nats keep spouting Unionist propaganda that Scotland is poor. In reality, of course, GERS has shown that in terms of public finance, we have a similar level of fiscal deficit as the UK.
That the UK wastes our wealth on neo-imperialist projects doesn't help - but they are wasting the wealth of everyone else in the UK as well. Unlike some other parts of the current UK state, Scotland can opt for making sensible choices. The task is to persuade of our fellow Scots of that. Once again, we are back to language - and whether grievance or aspiration is the way forward.
Complain about this comment
Right, on two questions I've emailed about 15 people I know. They all have a keen disinterest in politics, so consider them to be average voters, but not average intelligence as one or two are rather successful business individuals.
I asked the following questions:
"Do you see independence as a means to be free?"
In each case, the answer was "from what?".
"Would you be prepared to pay more tax if independent?"
Answers were not so clear, but the majority could not see a good reason to raise taxes if independent, considering we would have a large income from oil.
So, that perhaps indicates some of the issues out there. The "freedom" argument simply will not work. Why? Because people do not feel oppressed. The Poll Tax exercise will never, ever be repeated again. And that is the only example I can think of that people will relate to.
As to taxes, you need to give an extremely good reason to raise taxes. In the current economic climate you can be rest assured that would be political suicide for the SNP. If you don't believe me, then assuming we get fiscal control, see what happens if we end up paying more in tax than the English.
Remember, these are answers from people who either don't understand the issues or simply couldn't care less. The message has to be got out to the masses, and one of the best ways is by continuing to govern well in Scotland, which will give a taste of what is possible.
Grannie, how you can possibly say that the SNP performing well as the Scottish Government is not the way to independence is beyond me. I'd say it is the best way for the SNP to prove it.
Complain about this comment
Breaking news:
The Scots didn't invent the wheel!
But here is an abbreviated A-Z of Scottish inventions and discoveries
• Anaesthetics
• antiseptics
• Beta-blockers
• Bicycles
• Cash credit
• Colour photography
• computer games
• Cotton-reel threads
• Continuous electric light
• Criminal finger-printing
• Decimal points
• Fax machines
• Financial services by telephone
• Fountain pens
• golf
• Electro-magnetism
• Hollow pipe drainage
• Hypodermic syringes
• Insulin
• Kaleidoscopes
• Lime cordial
• lawnmowers
• marmalade
• Motor insurance
• microwave ovens
• Noble gases
• Paraffin
• penicillin
• Postage stamps
• Quinine
• Radar
• Reflecting telescopes
• Retail banking
• Savings banks
• Tarmac
• telephones
• Television
• Ultrasound scanners
• Universal standard time
• Vacuum flasks
• Waterproof mackintoshes
• Wave-powered electricity generators
Penicillin, for instance, discovered by bacteriologist Sir Alexander Fleming in 1928 has saved more lives than all those lost in all the wars in history.
Only last week the inventor of the bank ATM machine died in Scotland:
Inventor of cash machine, John Shepherd-Barron, dies.
Scotland has much to be proud of.
Note:
The telephone, was initially dismissed as having no value as 'there would always be an adequate supply of runners to carry messages in London', has transformed the way the planet communicates like no other invention: the telephone network has grown to be the 'biggest machine on the planet'.
Complain about this comment
Tories woo SNP with UK role.
SNP ministers will represent the UK Government in European talks under plans drawn up by the new Tory-Lib coalition pact.
Tory ministers believe that a co-operative approach to Scottish demands will help them shake off their Thatcherite image while also dampening support for independence.
The agreement centres on crucial EU negotiations on UK fisheries, the bulk of which are based north of the Border.
Meanwhile back at the NuLabour funny farm:
However, on the fisheries deal there were warnings from Labour last night that the UK government had to be careful not to break constitutional boundaries.
Aberdeen North MP Frank Doran said: "All foreign affairs are reserved matters, including fisheries."
This, I believe, is a double edged sword. If the SNP do well then it can only add to their credentials not only of governing Scotland but acting as statesmen albeit on the EU stage. If they don’t do well…. then its anybodies guess.
Complain about this comment
269. GrannieAnne
Oh no government will ever measure up to my expectations. I expect very high standards.
I'm not sure what part of "the UK is a lost cause" you don't understand. You seem to be suggesting that if my new car isn't as fuel efficient as I'd like I'd want my old car back, even if it was a dangerous rust-bucket with no brakes or steering that cost a fortune to keep on the road.
In your 274. you're just citing reasons why the Union has proven to be against the interests of Scotland. And we agree it's been a bad deal, so you don't need to persuade me. But your posts do not address the issue of where Scottish sovereignty actually rests. Ian Hamilton knows quite a lot about that. I'm sure he'd agree with me and not you on this particular point.
In 1953 the Lord Advocate, Lord Cooper, passed a legal ruling in which he stated
"The principle of the unlimited sovereignty of Parliament is a distinctively English principle which has no counterpart in Scottish constitutional law. ... I have difficulty in seeing why it should have been supposed that the new Parliament of Great Britain must inherit all the peculiar characteristics of the English Parliament but none of the Scottish Parliament...."
This ruling was widely interpreted as confirmation that Scottish sovereignty was not subsumed by English sovereignty in 1707. It also raised the question, if Westminster does not have unlimited sovereignty over Scotland, where exactly does Scottish sovereignty lie? The usual answer to that question is that ultimately sovereignty rests with the Scottish people.
One of those who brought the legal case was a certain Ian Hamilton QC.
But it's not just Scottish nationalists and supporters of independence who hold this view -
"We [Scotland] are sovereign within the Union and we can walk out any time we want."
That was Michael Forsyth, last Conservative Secretary of State for Scotland and arch-Unionist, speaking in 1997.
http://www.siliconglen.com/Scotland/19_5.html
278. If you can link to where any mainstream Unionist party has said Scotland has the right of self-determination, I would be interested in seeing it.
I just did.
What you're trying to do is to prove that we have a right to nationhood in the first place, but Scots do not need to be persuaded that we are a nation. We already know we're a nation. So at best the effort is wasted and at worst it just ends up alienating and annoying people.
We need to be debating what we DO with the national sovereignty that comes with nationhood, and which bits of it - if any - we should be sharing with whom.
Complain about this comment
How wind, tide and wave could power Scotland seven times over .
The windfall in Scotland's grasp from offshore renewable energy has been unveiled for the first time in a major new report that reveals it could power the country seven times over within four decades.
Value of offshore renewable energy is revealed.
The report said wind and wave power could generate the same amount of electricity as is currently achieved by North Sea oil and gas production.
Nuclear will not get atom of help from this Government, says Chris Huhne.
There is one issue, though, that could explode the new Liberal-Conservative Government — nuclear power. The Tories want to build a new generation of nuclear reactors: the Lib Dems do not. Mr Huhne will be allowed to abstain on a policy that his own department will take through Parliament.
Energy security 'made a priority'
The articles above reads like a book.
I wonder if there is a report on renewable energy, equivalent to the one produced by McCrone in 1974, being circulated around the 'British Establishment' Ministerial Offices as we speak?
Complain about this comment
Interesting article in the Sunday Times:
Scottish Tories may go it alone.
The Scottish Conservatives are discussing plans to split from the British party and form a new political force.
The breakaway party, whose working title is Scottish Reform, would seek to attract support from social and economic conservatives who have resisted voting Tory because of what they regard as the “toxic” legacy of the Thatcher era.
My view is that it will be a cosmetic branding exercise, they are to well connected at the hip to their cousins down south.
But hey ho, stranger things have happened, we may get the NuTory party in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
The Snp have a number of issues to sort out before they will ever be likely to achieve independence.
1. They have to convince the people that what they are offering is better than what we have got.
2. They have to show an economic plan that overwhelmingly will convince people that the Snp are right and the country should follow.
3. They have to learn to grow up as a party, they come across as an "in your face" party. Let the policies do the talking. They have to sell themselves as the number one option.
4. With the 4 party system + PR, it is virtually impossible for any party to gain outright control. The Snp has to learn to use the system to their best advantage. I see Devomax as the next goal.
Complain about this comment
304. At 05:22am on 23 May 2010, Roll_On_2011 wrote:
Scottish Tories may go it alone.
This is not as daft as it may sound. In the 50s the tories were called the "Progessive and Unionist Party" and did very well in those days.
Complain about this comment
298. At 00:19am on 23 May 2010, oldnat wrote:
295. eye_write
"We do have poverty but we are not the Third World. Do you think we are as badly off as the Third World?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We do have poverty in Scotland but it is caused through:
1.Addiction, Where the main family earner thinks its more important to stand at a bar for four hours a night smoking and drinking, or shooting themselves up with drugs rather than investing money in their family.
2.Financial mismanagement, Where the 60 inch plasma and sky hd box is seen to be more important than food for the kids and Clothes.
3.Laziness those who can't be bothered to work!
4.Pensioners, who have been left struggling on through years of Government neglect.
5.Single parent families, where the absent partner is too selfish and mean to help out with his kids or the mother is irresponsible by choosing a lifestyle which results in having multiple kids to multiple fathers.
None of these things are caused by Scotland being a poor country, its all mis-management and lifestyle choices. They have chosen not to take advantage of the education system that 90% of the population do very well in, I'm not saying this is the case for every one in "poverty" but some choose to live like they do because they don't have to try. Smoke drink ,feel sorry for themselves and blame every one else. That is there lifestyle choice. I've been unemployed and homeless, i've slept on a friends sofa for a year, but I like most people just get on with it and strive to get back on course, which I have done.
Complain about this comment
303. Roll_On_2011:
No matter what the Lib Dems say - or any other party for that matter - of people suddenly find themselves without energy, politicians will be forced to either provide the energy or get kicked out.
"People power" only really works when the majority of people are affected. Look at Greece for example. Thousands of people affected and they are out in force. OK, extreme elements join in, but the power lies in the bulk of people.
Just think what would happen if there were power cuts nowadays. Business would almost cease for starters.
Complain about this comment
307. patchbruce
Quite. I was not arguing that Scotland is poor.
Complain about this comment
298. oldnat
Quite. I was not arguing that Scotland is poor.
Complain about this comment
re 309 eye write
Sorry I was not getting at you, just having a personal rant at those who cost our country millions through laziness. Yes there are those you are genuinely less able bodied or ill but there are far too many people who expect us to look after them then laugh all the way to the bar with their income support.!
Complain about this comment
311. patchbruce
Ah, got you :-)
Agreed, there is something wrong when people believe that is the only way for them. Their perspective does have a significant part to play in it.
Complain about this comment
308. At 09:29am on 23 May 2010, enneffess wrote:
Just think what would happen if there were power cuts nowadays. Business would almost cease for starters.
It would not almost cease it would completely halt.
Other than Industrial Action, or meteor impact however, Scotland should never need be without power. Energy and our own national grid is one thing we HAVE to gain control over, Otherwise when the industrial heart lands of England start to run out of power WE are the ones who will suffer power outages as the current is directed to keep English industry turning.
We should be in a position where we are able to impose a "duty" on the power we WILL export down south. But that won't happen unless we start to believe in ourselves and believe we can run our own economy and affairs.
Complain about this comment
299. enneffess
305. Ron McArthur
Yes, it is very dangerous to assume the argument for independence is self-evident.
To most voters it is not.
The SNP I think (could do well to conduct research on public opinion, if it hasn't already!) and appeal to the Scottish sense of fairness, such as there is one (sense of social justice?).
I mean, present the things that some on here miscall and cite as grievances, as areas where independence would make things fairer. really boast about the positives.
i.e. dispassionately (important!) describe the situation as it is (e.g. with the BBC, or fishing, or climate change, or...it's got to be fact-based) where we are currently disadvantaged (don't make out it's a bigger problem than it is!), and set out clearly how independence would change that and make it fairer.
Then it becomes a clear choice between the unfair/unworkable and the fair/workable, the old and the improved - positive!
In this economic climate where we are going to hear more and more grumbles, give the people some opportunity to counter that. The clues are there: just look at when the NHS was founded.
Complain about this comment
313. patchbruce
The energy question would be another one where an objective accurate portrayal of the situation as is (let the public then make up their own minds as to its justness...the facts speak for themselves), and an equally straightforward set of corrective policy that would be a positive step it, because it would become a fairer system.
I think the voters would like that because you keep the 'grieving' ones on board, by addressing their gripes, and you gain new voters, because they are attracted by an improved, fairer outcome.
This avoids neatly all the OTT 'nat-fanaticism' emotive language and evidential 'impure' facts that I have said puts voters off.
Complain about this comment
315. eye_write
In fact on that issue by issue basis, it would be very easy to write an independence manifesto.
Complain about this comment
316. eye_write
As I say, independence must be addressed as a mechanism for desired change.
Complain about this comment
304. Roll_On_2011
"My view is that it will be a cosmetic branding exercise, they are to well connected at the hip to their cousins down south."
I am not so sceptical. I think a genuine Scottish Conservative Party would tend to jealously guard its independence from the UK Tories.
It might even prompt "Scottish" Labour to break away from NuLabour. And wouldn't that change the face of Scotland's politics!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS