The Scottish Government

Perhaps it's time to ask the good folk from south of the border to join in the 'conversation' and let us know whether or not they want us to stay in the union. My contacts suggest that they would respect us more if we decided to stand on our own two feet. The subject of Scottish independence is a distraction which they could well do without. Independence for Scotland would also mean they could keep more of their own money.

[1610], [1611], [1613] Of course when someone has nothing constructive to contribute and appears reluctant to provide even a name and location it is perhaps not surprising that what we get are attempts at petty political point scoring. Unfortunately for the perpetrator such attempts invariably backfire because sensible people will ask questions such as why were things allowed to get so bad that “Reclaiming the streets from hoodlums would do for starters”, why do we now appear to need an additional 1,000 police officers on our streets and why were we repeatedly told that with record levels of investment in our public services that Scotland is doing well and things are “getting better”??? Perhaps if some had had the conviction to ask the questions of the Labour party during the last ten years that they now seem enthusiastic to ask of the SNP within months of commencing a minority administration, then Scotland could possibly have made more progress on all fronts during that period?

Returning to the supposed subject of this ‘conversation’, what seems to be coming across in many of these postings is a general reluctance from those advocating continuing participation in the Union to admit to any of its current shortcomings, except when attacking those advocating Independence. Labour’s shifting stance on the question of more powers for Holyrood perhaps encapsulates this contradiction because obviously if everything has been rosy in the garden why would any significant change now be necessary? Clearly while some are still slow to recognize this contradiction, especially those that are still in denial at having been misled (or at misleading others) for so many years, others are beginning to be more pragmatic at last in recognizing that there are gains to be made for Scotland in having further control in certain areas of government. The pivotal questions then become how much control would be most desirable and who de we trust to tell us and deliver this control? Personally I am more inclined to trust those that tell me that there is a challenging path ahead that offers more hope for the future than trust those who continue to tell me we cannot do better than we are already doing within the Union until they are given no political choice, as with the result of the recent election, but to admit otherwise!

For those who simply cannot see the longer term benefits for Scotland in achieving the best possible constitutional outcome as early as possible, it is understandable that they would wish all political parties to focus on the immediate problems facing them. However, while accepting that these immediate problems must be confronted it is more important for our children that we have a strategy as a country that will not only help us to overcome these short-term problems but will increase the prospects of many more Scots in the future having the opportunities to realise their aspirations. ‘At the end of the day’ though the decisive argument on Independence may come down to the question of trust, and again it is understandable that many who have in the past felt let-down by the political process are reluctant to trust more politicians now, even if they are in another political party. But, being confident in the talents and abilities of my fellow-Scots (as evidenced historically and around the world) I personally am optimistic that we can and will do better in the future as an independent member country of the European Union!

I note that the poster named ‘Independence or Status Quo’ begins with a similar line to that used by a previous poster calling himself ‘Alex from Largs’. ‘Alex from Largs’ claimed that, despite having spoken to independence supporters, he had never heard any positive arguments for independence. Alex’s unawareness was subsequently rectified by many posters including myself on page #63 post #1563. For those logging onto the debate who are undecided it is certainly worth reading the exchanges involving ‘Alex from Largs’, for my part I believe that the pro-independence posts were positive.

Although ‘Independence or Status Quo’ does not plunge the depths of previous anti-independence posters like Alex who said of independence supporters that “their motivation is more a negative one, anti-English” his post sadly lacks any kind of positive argument in favour of the Union. Relying instead on a mixture of denegrating phrases “run after the European Parliament with a begging bowl”, “do we hide under the US nuclear umbrella”, snide remarks on Alex Salmond and scaremongering basically suggesting that oil is not worth much and therefor we are too poor.

‘Independence or Status Quo’ then makes a startling statement “There has to be more to the argument than we are a proud nation and should be able to stand on our own two feet!” and for once in the post he is absolutely correct, there is (see previous posts mentioned). Now, like ‘Alex from Largs’ we again have a poster who has never heard these positive arguments that he apparently craves. That is why this forum is such an excellent idea, people who otherwise would never be exposed to the positive arguments for independence due to media imbalance will be able to access them here.

Reagarding another couple of anti_independence posters:
Shaun @ #1602 wrote:
“If Scotland did gain independence I would demand to reamin a British citizen and would move to England.”

I’m not so sure about the first part Shaun but you could certainly move from an independent Scotland if you so wish.

Poster #1612 wrote:
“Who do you think you are introducing a note of sanity to the forum? Did you not know that it should be reserved for the 'Scotland Free' brigade, if we are to take notice of much of the invective used? There is a danger that people will read 'BNP'(equivalent), for 'SNP' if you assume you have a mandate from the Scottish people, which you clearly do not.”

I would urge any pro-independence supporters to refrain from responding to these sorts of messages in kind. I believe that the pro-independence body are winning the debate through positive argument and that any undecided voters are turned off by this kind of rhetoric.

Yay or Nea @ 1610 asks:
"Reclaiming the streets from hoodlums would do for starters. Why did (Salmond) say he'd recruit 1,000 new polis officers for our streets only to renege on this promise?"

Rest assured ‘Yay or Nea’, unlike Scottish Labour who promised no change, the SNP Government do indeed have a commitment to putting 1000 extra officers onto our streets. Some will certainly be new recruits but others will be as a result of freeing up deskbound officers.

#1608

Just back from a 3 week business visit to the US and totally agree with your brief analysis on Scottish identity. I can also confirm that independence and Sturgeon were topics of discussion, the former had something to do with the Dow Jones, and the latter had stung someone, or something....

#1609 David Coull from #1608

Who do you think you are introducing a note of sanity to the forum? Did you not know that it should be reserved for the 'Scotland Free' brigade, if we are to take notice of much of the invective used? There is a danger that people will read 'BNP'(equivalent), for 'SNP' if you assume you have a mandate from the Scottish people, which you clearly do not.

The Scottish people are not stupid and will need a more logical arguments than those that have being presented to date. Indeed one subscriber has complained that people are presenting ECONOMIC arguments against Independence. Shame on us?

Bearing in mind that we have an aging population who are living longer and are more likely to vote than the younger generations, it would be common sense to try to find a way of appealing to that section of the community!!

You, (SNP supporters), are making a pretty poor job of it so far!!

Refreshing to read some sense in this forum.

Thank You.

#1585 Am I right in saying you have copy pasted the first 5 or 6 paras from your reply #1509?

"Salmond needs to stop focusing on this issue, get some real work done."

Well said Shaun, #1602. Anyone who saw the debate on 4 October can see Salmond has more than enough on his plate as it is.

Reclaiming the streets from hoodlums would do for starters. Why did he say he'd recruit 1,000 new polis officers for our streets only to renege on this promise?

Then again, the oposition parties did say at the time that he wouldn't come good on this promise, only to have Salmond accuse them of being negative.... ho hum.

Graeme Stevens (1606) wrote "I'm disgusted that a union we were starved and bankrupted to get us to agree to.....is now the source of pride for some of my countrymen" - yes, the Scots were starved and bankrupted to get compliance with the Union, and even then only a tiny minority agreed to it in 1707, but an awful lot has happened since then. For instance, my 85 year old widowed sister takes pride in the fact that her late husband was wounded in fighting against Nazi Germany under the union jack. I personally feel no attachment to that flag, but it is a big mistake to dismiss the feelings of all those who do. Some folk can feel a bit "British" and yet be in favour of independence for Scotland now. We will need the support of such folk to win a decisive majority in a referendum on independence. Telling those who are a bit nervous about independence "You'll not be missed if you defect to England on Independence Day" is a BIG mistake. Even if you think that those you are addressing are "diehard" unionists, your comments will also be read by some "undecided" folk who are NOT "diehard" unionists, and who are liable to be put off by such language. We want a clear and decisive majority for independence in a referendum, and, after that clear verdict by the Scottish people, we want the large minority who voted _against_ to feel comfortable with that democratic verdict, and to remain as valued citizens of independent Scotland.

#1607 Louise

Believe it or not I would support Independence if a case could be made for it. However going for a split with the UK so that we could join up with the EU and run after the European Parliament with a begging bowl doesn't seem a good deal to me.

If we are independent do we become a member of NATO? If so will we have to pay for our own army, navy and air force. If not do we hide under the US nuclear umbrella, as suggested by the SNP leader, if so how much will that cost? Maybe George W will do look after us out of the goodness of his heart? (Make you feel confident eh?) If he is so confident of Scotland's future under his benign guidance why is he hanging on to his seat at Westminster? Remember he ran off there in the huff when we, the electorate, failed to deliver a majority in 1999! (His pension is worth more at Westminster, but sh! don't tell anyone!)

When Scotland joined the Union 300 years ago it did not come without some sacrifices by the people. There was a period of adjustment when the currencies were merged. In fact, we the people, in the UK, have experienced similar problems with decimalisation in the 70's.
What will it cost if we drop out of the UK £ and adopt the Euro as proposed by AS? Ask the Dutcg, German's, French... how much they feel they lost. How are fixed income pensions going to be affected? Who will guarantee the UK State pension for that matter?

A big play is being made of the price of oil being $80. When oil came ashore we soon had a price of $40 / barrel around 30 years ago, about £25 / barrel. At that time £2,500 a year was a reasonable salary, or 100 barrels of oil per year. If you take my word for it a salary of £2,500 / year is now about £30,000 per year, or at £40 a barrel (@ $2.00 = £1.00). Or 750 barrels of oil per year. That's how far the value of oil has fallen, and a measure of just how little our reseves are worth.

There has to be more to the argument than we are a proud nation and should be able to stand on our own two feet!

For the record almost every person in every country I have visited in my lifetime knows the difference between Scotland and England, (and Ireland and Wales for that matter). I have never felt that I needed to be independent to prove my allegiance.

I hope this helps you make up your mind.

There seems to be polarised opinions on this forum. There must be some point that we can all meet in the middle in deciding what is best for scotland. I would like independence like a lot of other people on here. However some people dont seem to want indpendence. Are they completely opposed because of a party political veiwpoint or are these personal veiws. If some people dont want independece do they want full fiscal autonomy but remain part of the union? I see people writing that independece wouldnt be good for the country. Well what would be good. Surely they are not advocating the status quo when all the political parties have come out and said the scottish parliament should have more powers. Are the people who dont want independece those who voted against devolution as well.