The Scottish Government

1413. asked a good series of questions
" so there isn't a thread of anti-English and anti-British feeling within the SNP family....Who, then..

1. stated that the Flag of the Union is the butcher's apron...

2. gleefully reported the exit of 'The Great Satan' (England) from a World Cup...

3. compared a senior Scottish Labour minister to WW2 traitor Lord Haw Haw...

4. accused the same Scottish Labour minister of being a Quisling...

5. demanded, at a meeting of activists, that the 'Brits' get out (presumably from Scotland)...

6. claimed that the British army presence in Scotland was an army of occupation...

7. stated that Scotland's divorce from Britain would see England lose a 'surly' neighbour..."

Could you give us the answer(s) Stevie? It would be nice to know...

Ardnafearn (1404) says "It is something in the gift of Gordon Brown whether or not to come up with an enabling act" - strictly speaking, that isn't even true in the legal sense. It could be argued that, legally, it is up to the Westminster parliament. Which is not the same thing as Gordon Brown. You may object that, politically, it amounts to the same thing. However, if we are going to be discussing political realities, rather than legal niceties, then NO WAY is it just up to Gordon Brown.

Legally speaking, in the seventeenth century, it was illegal for many thousands of Scots to sign a "Covenant" pledging themselves to actively resist any government policies designed to bring religion in Scotland more in line with the Church of England. Legally speaking, it was illegal for the thirteen American colonies to band together as a so-called "United States of America" and issue a Declaration of Independence. Legally speaking, it was impossible for the Suffragettes to force the British government into conceding votes for women. Legally speaking, it was impossible for myself and others in the large "army" of poll-tax rebels to force Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher into a U-turn over the poll tax. Historically speaking, all of these things happened, and the law just had to adjust to recognise the new political reality. Just as the law will continue to have to adjust to take account of new political realities in the future.

1406: You defined the eligible voters which cleared the waters for me if no one else. How will Alex Salmond coerce Gordon Brown into introducing an enabling act? His administration cannot initiate it itself. Perhaps 1406 has an answer for that too.

Frank #1386

Mmmm, so there isn't a thread of anti-English and anti-British feeling within the SNP family. Really? You sure about that?

Starter for ten. Who, then

1. stated that the Flag of the Union is the butcher's apron...

2. gleefully reported the exit of 'The Great Satan' (England) from a World Cup...

3. compared a senior Scottish Labour minister to WW2 traitor Lord Haw Haw...

4. accused the same Scottish Labour minister of being a Quisling...

5. demanded, at a meeting of activists, that the 'Brits' get out (presumably from Scotland)...

6. claimed that the British army presence in Scotland was an army of occupation...

7. stated that Scotland's divorce from Britain would see England lose a 'surly' neighbour...

Nice, positive comments, huh? Nope, I don't think so either.

Hope you enjoyed your cuppa. I prefer Diet Irn Bru myself.


Stevie

As a Scot living abroad due to work location my main question is :-

Would I be able to vote in this referendum ?

Also , I would hope that this question extends beyond an argument over an 18th century treaty and also embraces the wider questions of - Who are we as a Nation and what do we aspire to become ?

I have discovered in the past week or so that, whereas I voted for the SNP and favoured independence for Scotland, my true objections were less with the Union and more with the EU.

Gordon Brown is clearly pro-Union and pro-EU. I suspect that he cannot have both. Perhaps those Labour MP's who want a referendum, to decide if the UK should sign on to the latest EU treaty, Constitution Lite, have realised that THEIR futures may depend upon whether the UK stays in the EU.

If the UK withdraws from the EU I believe that enthusiasm for outright Scottish independence might diminish. A greater degree of control of Scottish affairs, and resources, such as oil and fisheries, under a federal arrangement, would probably then be more acceptable to most Scots, rather than outright independence.

It is significant, I believe, that support for the SNP has risen along with the committment of the UK to the EU. Perhaps the idea that we can cast off from England and join up with Europe is more attractive to Scots than merely going it alone. If this is true then my own preferred option of being independent outside the EU but with trading arrangements through the EEA, like Norway, most likely will find little support.

So, this exercise has been helpful in clarifying my own thinking and I imagine that of others too. Thanks for the opportunity to have a gab. I look forward to seeing how it all turns out.

During the May elections I was horrified by our so called free press.
The media bent all its efforts towards influencing the voters to vote anything but SNP.
I don't vote for Rupert Murdoch et al,I vote for the politicians not the presenters of Newsnight et al.
It would seem that the Scottish???? press is still trying to influence outcomes and is using inflammatory language and expressing opinion rather than reporting news.
If I see one more article quoting George Ffoulkes I shall not be able to keep my breakfast down.
I am ashamed of our Scottish broadcasters who show utter labour led bias,investigative journalism has died and in its place we have heavily influenced journalistic opinion.
Come on Scottish media get with the programme or are you too controlled by London?

To answer the question, does being part of the UK boost Scotlands interests in the international community can be answered in one word- No.

Not to give such a statement without backup,

Scotland currently has 6 MEP's, with a population of 5.5 million. This was reduced by two in 2004 and looks likely to be reduced by the same again soon.

Ireland, with 4.5 million people, has 15 MEP's.

What can you say to that?

1398. Sam - Castle Douglas Sunday, August 26, 2007 22:57

Sam,
You said " Please do not take this as a criticism, but if I had your understanding of these cases where cash diplomacy was present then I would have found some way to let this be known ".

Remain assured the messages were passed on. The UK government ministers entered into denial, there is a bizarre loyalty to fellow politicians from other EU states and there is a tendency to prefer to believe their hearsay denials (lies) as opposed to checking a raft full of written evidence. The European Commission people with great care and deftness worked very hard to do nothing. The EU agencies with the specific responsibility to investigate were lobbied hard and successfully by political parties and the European Commission not to act. The media, of course, had no interest. The lesson learned was that irrespective of the law, anything which might create political embarrassment to senior politicians is censored and no action taken.

The media could have cut through this stonewalling. This is why I think an independent Scottish Broadcasting Corp with a mission to pump out independent, comprehensive and unbiased information helping hold politicians to account is important - indeed Paxman** stated this to be what he thought the BBC should be about - now have you noticed how some journalists have tried to belittle Paxman for blowing the whistle rather than engaging in what he said?

You said, ", if you carry the political will then the rest of the crew will follow. That includes the journalists, the advisers, the great and the good. But again, it is people who are aware of the machinations who should be informing by whatever means and perhaps this political will might succeed."

I agree that the initial promise might well see things starting off in that direction ... for example, the motivations of the current small SNP team seem to be fine. The perennial problem is that once any party seems to be on its way to power a mass of self-seekers swing over to them drowning coherence and making it a tortuous labyrinth and largely out of control and like any other placing party/interests over people. Systems "in power" operates by removing the independence of representation through parties instructing politicians to vote with party and not constituency wishes; the very regrettable outcome is that in a modern so-called participatory democracy one can't trust a politician.
------------------
** I have always found Paxman's interview technique rather bizarre and sometimes rude and was therefore surprised to find myself agreeing with everything he said. Some more outspoken media people were very cynical about his underlying moral quest for media because "it isnt commercial" but this is missing Paxman's point I think.
IR

1337. livilion - livingston

“If we had the funds, everyone could have their own pet projects.”

“Pet projects” are all fine and well, but only if the important things are prioritized.

“Presumably you do not have friends or family members being raised in one of these dead end estates where life is just getting from one day to the next.
No-one seems to care and no-one seems to be prepared to help. “

Yeah, I was born into Drumchapel. I may not have lived there my whole childhood, but I remember enough, and my grandparents still have the cine-films in the attic. Where you’re from is what you make of it. Along the west coast and up through to Glasgow there are many places like this, and I have met many people who have gone on from these places to do not bad – I’ve met people from the roughest schools coming out with law degrees and people with all the benefits of private education completely failing to make anything of themselves. My grandfather, a miner, supported a wife and 5 children, while running a smallholding, saw all those children through to the end of school and into university, then went to university himself and became a teacher. So the problem is more to do with motivating people towards making the best of themselves, and getting the education to help them, or learning a trade.

I’ve already stated that, as Scotland has its own education system (which is a devolved issue), the Scottish Executive should show that this can improve, before it earns the right to bring us into an independent Scotland. When I was at school, I was doing extra activities every day after school – from setting rockets off on the school playing fields to playing in the orchestra (badly!). Using the powers Scotland already HAS to make positive changes would indicate a readiness for more.



1343. Sam - Castle Douglas

Okay, I’m tired of explaining what “Unionist” means to those of you misusing the word so atrociously, so please see my previous comments for said definition and note that after this post I will no longer be acknowledging replies to my comments by those who continue to use the word “Unionist” incorrectly.

Assuming you actually read my comments properly, you would notice that I very clearly stated that I did NOT expect everything to be miraculously fixed, just that I wanted some INDICATION that things were going in the right direction. A REDUCTION in the amount extra we get from the government proportionally. A REDUCTION in waiting lists, illiteracy and Social Problems. So no, I never said I wanted sunshine and rainbows, but the sign of the sun peeping through the clouds might be nice.


1385. Frank W – Glasgow

“It is a really positive discussion when you consider that we are trying to work out how we shall go about the process of independence and not IF we should have it at all. “

Thank you for actually getting my points rather that willfully misinterpreting them as seems to be happening. Either that or people just aren’t bothering reading anything that isn’t 100% in agreement with them!

I agree with your points about accountability – there should be more public methods of investigating transgressions.

As for the SNP getting things done, I’m not sure yet – they’ve made a half decent start (even if I think the attempt to stop the Edinburgh tram thing was a big mistake) – but I think we need to let them run a bit longer yet. There are plenty of promising starts in politics which have descended to chaos.


In a New Brainwave….

I was at a wedding at the weekend and popped into my sister’s on the way past Edinburgh. She brought up a point that I’m not sure is getting considered in the rushing rashly/creeping cautiously balance. It’s something that has crossed my mind but the discussion has been preoccupied with other issues. In the process of establishing independence there will be a number of time-consuming, costly legal issues to be resolved. Another reason to make sure we choose the right people and the right time to take us forward.

Another point that has arisen is where should the capital of Scotland be, and therefore the new Independent Scottish Parliament? At the moment, Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, but does not really have any of the features that I feel should dignify a capital.

It does not host the largest population in Scotland – That would be Glasgow at the moment.

The historic centre of Scotland (going waaaay back) would be Stirling I think, as it features most in the history so well cited in this discussion.

One of the prevalent issues on this site is Oil. Oil will fund Scotland, according to all the claims I’ve seen since joining this discussion. Therefore, Aberdeen will be the economic centre of the new Independent Country- the average household income is already higher than that in Edinburgh (http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1022062006), and if you add the revenue that it is claimed the oil will bring Scotland (personally, still not sure about that), this gap will increase.

So along, with the referendum on independence, can we also have a referendum on the location of the independent country’s capital? If you’re going to hinge the economy on oil money, the least you can do is acknowledge that money by placing the capital where it will preserve this.

Also, until Sunday, I had not actually been round Hollyrood since the parliament building went up, I’ve only seen it on television. Approaching it from behind my comment was “Urgh, why build ugly flats like THAT at the bottom of the royal mile?”. Who knew, the centre of our country looks like badly designed council flats! Seriously, what was wrong with Granite and Sandstone. So much cuter, but you all know that already, and I think everyone will agree with me on this!