The Scottish Government

1330. Stevie - Dundee
Do you really believe that those wanting independence for Scotland do so because they do not like English people? Really? you think that? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....good one!

I'm sipping a cup of tea just now because I don't like coffee.

Gabrielle H, Aberdeen
Thanks for your reply. I agree with your comments about discussion on here. I think it only demonstrates the lack of any Scottish history or politics being taught in our schools and much of it has been learned from a certain film starring Mel Gibson. I digress...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.

I am hoping that one day we shall see the 'changing of the guard' in Scotland being initiated with the same dignity and sense of optimism that was when Hong Kong was handed back to China.
I think Scotland has the energy, the brains and tenacity to do great things.

What we need from our leaders is a sense of national accountability and responsibility to serve and not be a career politician on a gravy train.
The talking has to be matched by deeds. Some argue an election every 4 years is accountability enough, well I disagree, because many of the MSP'S make more in 4 years than many people do in a lifetime in Scotland, therefore they should as a matter of course be held to account if required, and I don't mean by some Lordy best pal charge a fortune strung out for years enquiry.That is old school and isn't attractive, isn't serving the public who pay for it and is an insult to our intelligence. Whatever we choose, we shall choose wisely and let's hope we can at least rid ourselves of old politics, old ideas and the apparatchiks who have stifled us and let us be big enough and brave enough to try something new. I predict that the party electoral system will become less and less important and people will choose good candidates instead. One thing is certain,like them or not, SNP has already shown that goverment CAN actually get things done and doesn't have to form a committee of old pals or a focus group to do so.

I think it is great that we have at least a forum to express our views. Ok, you lot out there may only be one person using a hundred names but hey, I feel better for having the chance of saying it! Thanks Mr Salmond

To our man in Washington, Scotland, Allan Steele

To be fair I did not read the Steel Commission Report on Federalism so you may wish to discount anything I have to say on the matter. However I did spend many years in North America, where federalism is the form of government, and I did take an interest in the discussions there centred on power sharing between the Provinces (States)and the Federal Governments.

Dave Coull in Balnabreich has taken issue with you on a federal arrangement for the UK on the basis that the assymetry amongst the member ststes is too great, England comprising 85% of the population. I would tend to agree with that assessment although I oppose federalism on different grounds.

I have read the Constitution of the United States several times and can state unequivocally that the form of goverment in that country today bears little resemblance to the original vision of the founders. The Federal Government has accrued power to itself well beyond the original conceptions of Jefferson, Madison, Washington, Franklin et al.

The Canada Act of 1982, passed in Westminster gave Canada full sovereignty through the Constitution Act contained within it, originally the British North America Act of 1867. There has never been much love lost between the Provinces and the central government for the same reason there is tension between Westminster and the subject nations of the UK; this in spite of the fact that, in Canada, the Provinces have control of their natural resources within their respective land territories.

The principal dynamic operating against the interests of the States and Provinces of North America is the natural inclination of political power to gravitate towards the centre. Today in the USA an amazing amount of control is exercised by the Courts and the Executive Branch through the simple expedient of Executive Orders which require no Congressional oversight. President Bush is using them to further his globalist agenda and President Clinton used this subterfuge to implement wide ranging environmental regulations that are eliminating the private property rights of Americans. In a recent eminent domain case before the Supreme Court a municiapl government was able to expropriate private property, without just compensation, to facilitate the construction of a PRIVATE shopping centre. The list of farmers and ranchers who have lost land to environmental concerns, such as the protection of the habitat of water lice, is large and growing. The Federal Government now owns 57% of the land in the USA much of which is being turned into wilderness at the insistence of ecological groups.

The leaders of the USA, Canada and Mexico recently met in Ottawa to discuss the extension of the Security and Prosperity Partnership which is an outgrowth of the North American Free Trade Agreement. This agreement gives extraordinary powers to the Executive Branches of all governments to implement radical changes in the polity of their countries without Congressional or Parliamentary oversight.

All of this is reminiscent of the incremental way in which the European Union has grown stealthily from a Coal and Steel agreement between France and Germany into today's Byzantine and all encompassing web of regulation, governing virtually every aspect of our lives with no true democratic oversight or input.

My objection is to the entire exercise of trying to design a political structure that will preserve the career paths of politicians under the guise of "power sharing" amongst national jurisdictions. There is no such thing, except in the naive fantasies of those with no experience of the venality of human nature. If our politicians are truly concerned with what will best serve the interests of Scotland and her people then they must put their own ambitions to the sword. We must set ourselves free from political entanglements with national and supranational entities of all sorts, create our own Constitution and Bill of Rights to govern our own Republic of Scotland and enter into trading and labour exchange agreements with nations whose interests, vision and development resemble our own. If we settle for anything less, no matter how seductively presented, we shall regret it.

I wish Alex Salmond and co 100% success in their desire to bring Independence to Scotland. However they have to be very carefull of the press and unions in Scotland who will do every thing in their power to sling mud at the executive in the hope of bringing them down and returning Labour to power. Dont forget the Daily Records political editor a certain mr Lironi is in the pay of the Labour party and will be 100% biased in his reporting. Anyway hopefully Scotland is wakening up and realising that there IS life after the Labour party after all and we can and will survive without Westminsters interfierence

#1162 Ed Gray: You misinterpreted my comment on Identity, my sense of identity and culture are in tact they are NOT dependent on a political party banging on about re-claiming them, to re-claim them suggests I have lost them. SNP is nothing without ASalmond As for people from afar suggesting they would come back to Scotland if we had Independence, a lot more would leave myself included. Independence is a state of mind for each individual.

A lot of people posting here seem to be under the illusion that an independent Scotland would be insular, backward thinking, racist, anti-English and everybody else, irresponsible, lacking in guile and substance, corrupt, etc etc.
How can this be when the whole concept of independence is exactly the opposite; we need independence to manage our own affairs and take our modern 21st century country into the world where we can be the leader and set an example to everyone of how a country should be run.
Scotland has been starved of investment and abused by Westminster Goverments for too long and action needs to be taken now to ensure that we can break free and solve our own problems. We can't do this until the shackles are removed and we have control over our own destinies.
Who's to say that in 10 or 20 years we won't be the most successful country in the world; we'll never know if we don't try? Yes it's scary, yes it could go all wrong but we couldn't be any worse off than we are now because we don't have any power to influence anything.
I've worked hard for everything I've got; I pay my income taxes and council tax, road tax etc, but have always resented the fact that the bulk of that money doesn't even get spent in Scotland but gets wasted by Westminster elsewhere. The union is supposed to be equal but this will never be the case as England grab the biggest share and keep it for themselves no matter what they say. Wales & Northern Ireland probably get an even worse deal than us as does the north of England beyond the Watford Gap.
All the opposition parties and the SNP in Scotland have a duty to the Scottish people, who elect them, first and foremost and they must start talking about this now instead of squabbling like spoilt kids. It's time to grow up and put your cards on the table so we can all work out the solution in a mature and sensible way?

I have just read the McCrone report from 1975 which, if you try and read between the lines of waffle, states quite openly that an independent Scotland would have flourished, indeed would have surpassed all expectations at the time. It's no wonder that the Westminster Goverment at the time panicked and then sabotaged the 1979 Referendum with the 40% rule.
It is quite clear to me that England would have become a non entity in Europe and the World stage if the 1979 Referendum had been in Scotlands favour; while Scotlands influence would have increased ten fold and more. The EEC won't dump Scotland if we gain independence because they would need us more than ever.
I was concerned however to read in the report the following statement.
"Britain is now counting so heavily on North Sea oil to redress it's balance of payments that it is easy to imagine England in dire straits without it. The oil prices since the Yom Kippur war make this a much more serious matter than could have been imagined before; and it is now likely that transfer of North Sea oil to Scottish ownership would occasion much bitterness in England if not an attempt to forcibly prevent it."
Were they going to invade us if we had won independence, over OIL? Does this seem a little similar to more recent events in Iraq where the UK was led illegally into a war the people didn't want because of, let's face it, OIL?
It's scary to think that our dear, benign neighbours would have acted so violently against us; their so called UK is a sham and they have consistently lied to all the population for all of these years.
What have Labour, Lib/Dem's and Tories got to say about that?

No 1346 Ian Ross
I stand corrected. Yes I agree that cash diplomacy goes on within the EU as it does outside of the EU, but until you can show me where this does not happen then I would rather sleep with the devil I know. I do not like the way the EU stitch's up third world farmers to protect our own but who really cares? certainly not our farmers.
What I was attempting to demonstrate was that politicians are not alone in this, civil servants too contribute single sided research into the formulations of positions that coutries adopt in order to protect their status quo, although in some cases like the difference between Malta's fishing protection and Scotlands, its obvious that some blatant selling of national interests were agreed and accepted. Certainly not in Scotlands interest.
I am aware of a village abitior in one of the established parts of the EU that only opens its doors for two days per week then sells on via its attached shop the proceeds of that days kill. Yet I recently heard of a Scottish farmer who has to take her pedigree Highland cattle to an abitior some 150 miles from her farm because its the only one licensed to kill HORNED beasts. So how come the difference between standards? Do you think it's due to some cash diplomacy?
I have seen many contradictions between what is acceptable in the EU and what the Uk's beauracratic state enforces with such eagerness and of course the media allways report the problems and never show the positive parts. Even J Paxman recognises this. Instead of informing people, the media appears to relish in publishing the dross. I was influenced by them and I was very EU sceptical before I traveled and worked within the EU and now I am definately more in favour of the concept than I was. But only within an independent Scotland. It all boils down to trust.

To all those undecided I say what has the British Government done for you in the last 10 years and what do you think could a Scottish Government do for you in the next 10 years.
If the answer is I dont know to both questions then why are you still hesitating.
It cant be any worse than it is now and at least we could say that whatever happens it's down to us and we can no longer blame our fortune or misfortune on anyone else but ourselves.
The Scots are so capable and so eager to develop I just don't understand why it has taken us so long to get to this stage.
Yes I do; the restraints and lack of commitment from Westminster for the development of Scotland. We've been a resource and source of income for Britain far too long. Lets do it our way for a change and be the nation that we once were.

#1363 Alan Duncan, A proud Scot eh! who prefers his country be governed by the English parliament, interesting concept, but certainly doesn't work for me, sorry. And your final remark convinces me your an anti-Scottish, greedy, money orientated individual and I would be only too glad to book the Pickfords van for you and pay it myself!!