The Scottish Government

I would agree of course that for Scotland to achieve FULL independence she must have the FULL authority to legislate and govern. However if she applies to join the EU, and is accepted, this authority would be radically diluted and, given the most recent surreptitious adoption of the EU constitution disguised as a new treaty, we would return to a worse situation than we are in today with Brussels in the place of Westminster at the centre of the web entangling us. As long as we are accountable to some higher government of men that can override the decisions made by the elected government of Scotland, acting on behalf of the sovereign people of Scotland, we cannot truthfully say we are indpendent. Europe is a conglomeration of countries and regions, all with dramatically different ideas about how government should work and where sovereignty ultimately lies; a veritable Babel of conflicting ideologies. Scotland gave birth to the idea that the people are sovereign. England has never adopted this belief and is oligarchic in thinking and culture. France and Germany, who are the primary creators of the governance structure of "Europa", are culturally and philosophically married to the idea of top-down government derived from their history of autocracy. Unless these facts, and others like them, are laid before the people of Scotland then I must regard any claim to be having a "conversation" as being, at best, spurious, at worst a deliberate attempt on the part of the SNP to further the ends of the Franco-German alliance in Brussels.

independence is long overdue the so called union is a con it is really a take over by england they have taken industry out of scotland..if we don,t get independence soon there will be nothing left,,,,,

This whole independance debate is really beginning to annoy me. Everyday you pick up a newspaper or switch on the T.V to find Alex Salmond or one of his SNP counterparts banging on about the benefits of self governance. Of course this is something which many of my fellow Scots find attractive. Governance of ones own affairs, control over North Sea oil and gas revenues etc does have a certain appeal but on the whole would independance be of benefit to most Scots? In my opinion the answer is most certainly no. Like many Unionists I believe that a newly independant Scotland would struggle economically in an increasingly competitive global market. Although I would accpet that at some point the Scottish economy would find its feet in the short to medium term many hard working Scots would suffer as economic uncertainty effected jobs, investment, interest rates etc. It is also naive to assume that as part of the fifth largest economy in the world Scotland does not do well. Indeed, foriegn companies are, in my opinion, more likely to invest in a Scotland which is a part of a strong and established economic power. Secondly, the Scottish parliamnet recieves substantial amounts of money from the Treasury each year which allows it to provide valuable services such as Free Care for the elderly. Could an independant Scotland fund such services as well as make money available for transport provisions, schools, pensions, social security benefits, free health care etc. This I believe would prove extremely difficult especially when one considers that North Sea oil and gas fields are reaching the end of their productive lives. I also believe that independance would be socially destructive. Even assuming that Alex Salmond can convince the public that independance is something worth grasping there will be a large proportion who would oppose such moves. This, in my opinion, would polorise society into two opposing camps. Although one could argue that we already have two such camps i.e Nationalists and Unionists, such far reaching economic, political and constitutional change would almost certainly stir emotions on both sides which could have grave social consequences.

I wish these unionists or loyalists or whatever they call themselves would get a life. Scotland is a nation and the will of the Scots will prevail. Independance is the way forward. There is nothing to fear.Who the hell wants to be known as a british subject anyway? I am a Scottish citizen and have never been subject to anyone.

Ever since I was a schoolboy, almost 60 years ago, I have been convinced of the overwhelming case for Scottish independence!Indeed I stood as a Nationalist candidate in a mock election in 1950! At that time I believed that Scotland had all the resources necessary to be self sustaining. The main thing which has changed in all this time is that we have discovered even more resources which we never dreamed of, such as Oil and unlimited potential for renewable energy! All we have lacked has been the confidence to take our future into our own hands. Critics say: "But you'll make mistakes!" to which the only answer is: "Yes, but they will be OUR mistakes, and it will be up to US to put them right". Freedom will always carry with it responsibility, and we should wish for nothing less. Let's go forward with confidence in our future, safe in our own hands!

I think David Robertson's comment (#1) was thoughtful. While I'm sure that Scotland has started a journey towards independence, it is certainly necessary to consider the implications of sovereignty and the hazards of "treaty" relationships; would it be necessary (or inevitable) for us to be bound to the EU? I understand that Norway has been able to progress without such involvement. Perhaps we should be looking at their experience? (We should certainly examine every opportunity to have involvement with our Norwegian cousins, whose links to us are almost as certain as our Celtic connections).

Putting aside the EU argument,it must be recognized that when we gain independence we will continue to have strong cultural and financial ties with every political entity of the existing UK. Just as New Zealand and Australia are able to interact (despite mutual suspicion), we should be able to enjoy relationships (even if they are self-seeking) with our neighbours.

Thank you, Robert, for starting this thread in the conversation.

I agree with contributors No 1 & No 6. Independence can only be achieved if it is outside Europe otherwise we are just replacing one master, or mistress, with another.
It is time that the SNP took this option seriously otherwise all they can claim to be is anti English or possibly anti British.
Independence means being free of all outside control and that includes Europe. If Norway can do it then so can we.
"Scotland in Europe" is without validity, we would just be another small subsection of Europe reliant on handouts and subject to economic controls that suit the bigger nations.

Ah, this is better, much easier to keep track, thankyou.

It really is quite heady having a government that's listening and reacts positively to criticism rather than going all defensive.

More power to your elbow,..and our parliament.

Post 3 24 Aug by Craig Cook

Don't get hung up on Oil. Ireland has no oil and their GDP per head is almost twice what Scotland's is (if you believe the Scottish figures from the previous Lib/Lab Executive). There is now a separate thread for economic issues.

I have more faith in the democratic nature of the Scots than you. Independence will come when the majority wish it to, not before.

#3. Craig Cook - Glasgow
Friday, August 24, 2007 16:36

How annoying are you finding it Craig to be permitted to have your say heard instead of being told that the problem is that you are not getting the government's message?

This is the first time in my adult life that any government has asked me for my opinion and been able to share it without them first deciding if it is 'on message' or not.

I would say that you appear to me to contradict yourself: you think Scotland could not survive economically outside of the UK but argue to be released from the EU.
The political facts of life are that even the mighty Great Britain is too small to defend itself from global economic forces.
Remember Black Wednesday? A UK, never mind Scotland, outside of the economic powerblock that is the European Union would not last a week.

Norway is different from the UK in that it does not have a balance of trade or manufacturing deficit.
Yes, it's the oil and how they've used theirs and how we've squandered ours.

If we'd had independence in 1974 then yes we would've had no need for the EU but we didn't and so we do.

The UK on the other hand, even if it has the 5th or 8th largest cash flow in the world (not the same thing as 'Strongest economy'at all),is up to its eyes in debt, £1Trillion or 87% of GDP? and dependent on the mood of the markets as we saw the other day.

US investors got the jitters and £billions were wiped off the value of UKplc in an instant.
We were saved, for now, only by the intervention of central banks eg. shoring up the US dollar.

You don't think Scotland would prosper. The Adam Smith Institute, that bastion of the Westminster establishment, begs to differ:

""...If an independent Scotland chose to follow the Republic of Ireland’s low-tax route, as SNP leader Alex Salmond has indicated it would, Scotland’s growth rate might be expected, over a five-year period, to move closer to Ireland’s trend growth rate of 7 percent.

Given a further five years of Scottish growth at that trend level, and before diminishing returns set in, Scotland’s growth over the ten-year period would put its index 71.5 higher, more than a two-thirds increase in GDP.(currently ~£125bn)

By contrast, says Stein, the rest of the UK would be expected to have grown rather less, by just over a quarter.

The result would be dramatic for Scotland.
Measured in household income per head, Scotland, which started £1,700 behind the rest of the UK, could be expected to be £6,000 ahead of it at the end of that period...""
http://www.adamsmith.org/images/uploads/publications/Independent_Scotland_Riches.pdf

So much for Labour's £5,000 cost per household claims for independence.
Another 'McCrone' perhaps?