The Scottish Government

Lorren, I think thats the defining arguement in this for me. Why let someone else run our country for us? We are the only "proud" and "patriotic" nation on the planet thats not proud and patriotic enough to stand on our own two feet. Im ashamed people want the union to continue, why?

As for the comment on slavery made earlier, pardon me, but didnt Britain do alot of trading slaves before proudly "setting them free". As I said in a previous post, it took 64 bribed people to sell us down the river, and Im disgusted that a union we were starved and bankrupted to get us to aghree to (and even then no scotsman ever agreed to it) is now the source of pride for some of my countrymen. Shame on you. Youll not be missed if you defect to england on Independence Day.

#1602

Alec Salmond WON on the issue of Independence. and self Determination for the Scottish people. Didn't you notice, it was in all the papers.

Why do you choose to be controlled by another country . I'd love to know , I really would.

When have you known a Nationalist not to be strong in his beliefs. Quite honestly I dont know what point you are trying to make.

No one is wasting their time here. Mabey only you , with your obvious hit and run comments and negativity. Give people a reason to stay with the Union and we will listen, but just to make your sweeping statements with no proof, tells me to disregard all you say.
You have a right to your opinion, but please tell us why we should remain within the Union ?

#1602 Shaun.

After 300 years, isn't it about time this so-called union was at least subject to examination of fitness for purpose in the 21st Century?

Whatever our constitutional arrangements, shouldn't we be working towards the best possible future, informed by constructive debate and the fullest illumination of the relevant issues?

And if only 'strong nationalists' are setting the agenda, why don't YOU - or ANYONE who thinks they can explain the merit of begging-bowl economics - try to contribute something that might make a case for continuing with the union?

Or is it that 'wiser' unionist heads remain stuck in the sand in the hope that positive aspiration will peter out and 'No Change' will win by default?

Why devide people even more than they already are? Why cant we just live and work together? There are too many countries in the world. The UK is one of the most successful nations on earth and we should be proud to be a part of that. If Scotland gained independence Salmond would simply sign us up to the euro and allow us to be governed by an even further away parliament than that of Westminster - Brussels. I would support a referendum on the issue of independence so we can get it sorted. I dont support it and I dont support devolution. If Scotland did gain independence I would demand to reamin a British citizen and would move to England. Of course I would vote again independence, however Im so fed up with nationalists swamping every forum on the net with this issue, so lets get it over with.

This whole website is bias as only strong nationalists will bother wasting there time preaching to each other here.
Long live the union. Salmond needs to stop focusing on this issue, get some real work done.

Colin Anderson (1577) says "Everything in this country is party political" - that's not true. I'm not a member of any political party, and I have _never_ been a member of any political party, and yet I seek political objectives without being party political. For instance, I was involved in the campaign against the poll tax, which succeeded in its objective of getting rid of the poll tax, and I was a member of the Campaign for a Scottish Parliament, whose objective was achieved on the 12th of May 1999. Now I am involved in campaigning for a referendum on independence, again on a non-party-political basis.

Colin says "I know that a referendum can simply be a Yes/No response to a set question, but who sets the questions?" - answer, of course politicians are bound to try to set questions to suit their own interests, but there is a limit to what they can get away with. We have been invited to take part in a national conversation. WE, the people of Scotland, can help to set the question we will be asked. I think what most people want is a simple, straightforward question.

Colin asks "Which group of people decides the timing?" - answer, of course politicians are bound to try to time things to suit their own interests, just as the prime minister tries to set the timing of a general election to suit the interests of his party, but there is a limit to what they can get away with. We have been invited to take part in a national conversation. WE, the people of Scotland, can help to decide the timing of the referendum.

"I think that the level of support for independence within the pro-union parties is pretty low" - let's face it, their entire membership figures are pretty low! What matters is not the level of support amongst their MEMBERS, but the level of support amongst their VOTERS. That is an entirely different matter.

REFERENDUM NOW - INDEPENDENCE - YES OR NO

I do not want adestruction of the Union. I have watched too many people suffer and die in my time in the British army to believe that what you are propsing is anything but wrong. Britain, is an ideal which others still dream about and want. It has for so many people been the great liberator from slavery and oppression. The union Flag in Kosovo, kuwait and Sierra Leone, meant something. That people of diverse ethic background could expect fair honest treatment. Your proposals expose nasty self interest, populist national facsism and a destruction of a force for international good. No No No. Don't make my sacrifices worthless.

Charles Ball,
British and Scottish Soldier.

REGARDS ALL THE COMMENTS IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE NATIONALISTS AND THE UNIONISTS IS THE NATIONALISTS HAVE MORE SELF CONFIDENCE IN THEMSELVES AND WONT TO PUT THERE COUNTRY AND NATION FIRST WHERE AS THE UNIONISTS SEEM TO BE MORE INSECURE AND PERHAPS INTERDEPENDANT AND TRAPPED IN A DEPENDENCE CULTURE NATIONALISTS WONT MORE AND EXPECT MORE FOR THERE NATION WHERE AS THE UNIONISTS SEEM TO MORE OR LESS SEE WHAT THERE COUNTRY CAN DO FOR THEM QUOTE ANY MAN THAT WOULD GIVE UP HIS COUNTRIES FREEDOM FOR WEALTH DESERVES NIETHER, ENQUOTE.

It's a welcome change from the last administration at Holyrood to be actively encouraged and asked for our views as opposed to being the passive recipients of imparted dogma. In especial, the matter of whether we as a nation should decide to regain our independence or not is a matter for ourselves and no-one else to decide. Individually, I have always supported the view that Scotland should be independent, practically speaking though i think it unlikely to be broadly supported at this time. It seems to me that national confidence in our ability to self govern has to grow and be developed by a track record of success in assuming more devolved responsibilities in the first instance. I think it's only when a broader representation of Scots are reassured that the negative images of independence so blatantly manipulated and orchestrated by its' opponents and their allies in the media are just an attempt to frighten the populace with a bogeyman- then we'll be nearer to independence. Increased devolution is the first step but won't be enough if it doesn't definitely include fiscal responsibility and that this is subsequently exercised better than from Westminster. That would go a long way towards reassuring people with justifiable reservations. All the same, I'll vote for independence every time.

I was thinking about this the other night....
It only took 64 (bribed) nobles to send us into the union and thats (it seems) good enough for international law nowadays to accept as there is no question of legality. Therefore, why not have it if 65 people will vote for independence, we should get it back?

It took 64 folk to throw scotland away, why should it need 2million plus to get her back?

Times have moved on, but its just a thought I was pondering the other day!