The Scottish Government

Apologies to Gavin Roberts, missive 75. I made a mistake - my last missive was in fact intended for Stewart of Stirling, missive 86.

Unionis - from loathsome toadying, through to the deeply psychotic !!!

I have read with interests a number of the missives from unionists - from the old adagge 'we couldnae manage on our own' through to the deeply psychotic views of Stewart of Stirling - that 'we can beat the best in the world, but only if give up our political rights and are governed from Westminster'. Oh, if only Stewart had been around in 1946, India would still be part of the Empire.

I believe that Scotland is already well on her way to full independance, when the day comes it will be an endorsement of the completion of a long process rather than a political act or event.

I do not believe that we should rush to become members of the EU. There are countries who have suffered no disasters as a result of operating alongside the EU. Norway being the most obvious and successful.

The opposition parties in Scotland will now have to become more Scottish, ensure greater representation of Scottish interests in the future if they are to ragain the seat of governance of Scotland. The process continues. The independance of Scotland is not a question of 'if' it is a question of 'when'

#20. Stewart from Stirling sums up exactly why it is more mature and sensible in the 21st century for Scotland to continue its engagement within the UK as a means of ensuring a better deal for Scots rather than become a small high tax so-called "independent" state. Global companies have more power than small countries such as an independent Scotland so lets not kid ourselves any more. Only through a united UK voice in Europe can we have any real and significant influence on how our future prosperity can continue to improve as the far east economies grow ever stronger. (The alternative would be to become something like the 52nd state of the USA - cringe!)

In response to Gavin Thompson - I must say that I am enjoying this debate with you. I like to wynde people up you see! And I accept that there is room for gentle banter.

Unsurprisingly however there is much of what you are saying that just doesn’t wash with me. You say that it is not the English that see us Scots as a joke rather unionists like myself. This dig just doesn’t make sense, especially if you consider what I have said in previous threads. If you would care to read through a few of my older posts you will see that I have gone on record as saying that I am both a Scot and a Brit. Why can’t you get your head around this fact? I am Scottish and I am British, I see no contradiction whatsoever here!

You say that my unionism is motivated by fear - a fear that the benefits which I receive from the 'existing system' would be threatened by independence. This is a naive statement to make as such conclusions could only be reached if you knew me personally, although I will give you points for attempting the first online psycho-analysis. However, just out of curiosity could you explain to me what you mean by the existing system? Your a bit vague here if you ask me.

I also feel obliged to correct you by making it clear that I do not consider the Scottish identity inferior to the British, I consider it equal.

Now I am glad that you have asked 'us' unionists to explain our emotional attachment to the union. Much of the argument so far has been put in financial and economic terms. For me cultural ties are just as important to the argument. Thousands upon thousands of Scots live and work south of the border. Millions have family and friends living all across the UK. We more or less share the same language and values, we eat the same foods, enjoy the same television programmes, we take pleasure from same pass times. We even share the same currency. Tartan and bagpipes aside, we each SHARE a common culture. Sure we Scots have our own traditions, we always will, but culturally there is very little to distinguish us from our friends and neighbours in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Leaving whatever economic argument you may have to one side could you now explain to me why we should separate ourselves from other Britons, people with whom we have cultural, family and historic ties?

Can I also say that you are free to celebrate Scottish distinctivness. But whats wrong with celebrating this within the UK. Does being part of Britan erode your 'Scottishness' in some way?

Turning our attention to the current constitutional set up you ask where would I draw the line. Well to be perfectly honest I believe that the Scottish parliament, at present, has enough powers to tackle the real issues which affects most Scots. Stop and speak to ordinary people on the streets and they will tell you that crime, health care, education etc are the real issues not independence. Do we not have a parliament equipped to deal with these concerns?

Nonetheless, I am not blindly opposed to the granting of more powers to Holyrood. If I believed it was in Scotland's interests and did not pose a threat to the union then I would not oppose. Just now however I see no need to tamper with the current constitution. Has devolution in the form we know today not worked? The smoking ban, free care for the elderly, the huge investment in new school buildings are just some of the achievements delivered by the current system.

I'm amazed that when reading the missives from the unionistas, that they all say Scotland is better off joined to England. Personally, I'd put it the other way.

The point is that all the excuses fro unionism have been heard before, only it used to be called empiricism! The empire has gone and soon Westminster will have to fight it's own wars.

People are fed up of rule from London and the snouts in the trough. By all means, be a unionist, but you'll soon find out that the only people who'll share your views will be the DUP!

In answer to Craig Cook, issive 95

Firstly Craig - I too am enjoying this banter.

You make great play of the fact that you are both Scottish and British and you see the 2 identities as equal. But how can it be equal when serious powers are reserved to Westminster in preference to Holyrood. I ask again what kind of equality is it that gives key powers to Westminster over Scotland in preference to the Scottish government in Holyrood itself ? This is by definition not equality, it is political dependence albeit, eroded to an extent by devolution.

You also go to explain your emotional attachment to the union. You mention family etc., language values etc. But what makes you think you would have to give up any of this sharing. We are talking here about a political settlement - not some kind of iron curtain. Has devolution somehow reduced any of this sharing; what makes you think full self rule or even independence would make any difference to that. For heavens sake, as part of the EU there are open borders - but you don't see the French begging the Germans to take over the Eyleesee Palace, so that they can somehow get even friendlier.

I remember as a kid my parents always told us to share our toys, but that didn't mean I had to sign over ownership of my favourite toy to my older brother.

You say the Scottish and English identities are equal, but presumably the English are more equal than others, since it is they that run the Westminster government that controls Scotland,Wales and Ireland. By definition we are not equal, nor can we be while 90% of the population are English and Just 8% Scottish.

In an independent Scotland you could still celebrate you Britishness, and visit your Granny in Yorkshire or anywhere else. The island of Britain would still exist.

It is refreshing that you do not oppose devolution and would even accept an extension of powers to Holyrood. You then add the caveat 'so long as it did not threaten the Union'. But how would you know when it threatened the Union ? For example, arguably we could have all powers except Defence & Foreign affairs. The Union would stll exist. The Crowns would still be united. More importantly you could still visit your granny in Yorkshire.

Mine is not a blind xenophobic nationalism, based on hate of anyone. If I for one minute thought that this was what I was supporting I would stop.
Nonetheless, I don't think our current devolution has the levers of power it really needs to make a serious differance. Given the recent election and current moves within Holyrood itself by all parties I think my view is shared by the vast majority.

The only thing a really abhor is corruption in all its forms, and I suspect we may share more than you might think on this point - but this will have to be subject to a separate missive.

Awrabest

In answer to Stewart of Stirling,missive 86 and 87

I note with interest Stewart that in missive 87 , you say 'England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales...I can be who I want to be'. Which one are you today ? Do you have a parrot on your shoulder ? Are you wearing a frock ? I would just like to confirm which of your mulitple identities I am actually adressing today ?

Anyway, I will try to make this as universally understandible as possible. You make a very valid point that the Scots should take responsibility for their own problems and stop blaming the English.

I would argue that is exactly what us nationalists are doing. We are taking responsibility, taking back responsibility for our own government as a first step for sorting out our own problems.

You make the point that Scots have achieved great things within the Union. You mention the Scottish enlightenment and the powerhouse of Glasgow.

Because it was good once doesn't mean it must always be so. You ask what has changed. Well quite a lot actually. The Empire has had its day. Slavery has been abolished. We now have democracy, and universal education. Aspirations are far higher - I could go on. Things have moved on.

How much more could now be achieved if there were an independent Scotland to provide a forum to express all our Scottish talents.

Are you arguing Scots can only succeed so long as we don't bother with the distraction of running our own affairs. It is a strange kind of patriotism that demands you gives up all your political rights -so that you can succeed ???

Let me get this straight - you hand over your government to those that have little interest in your success and then by some sort of miracle you succeed anyway ?

It certainly alters ones view of world history. Maybe we have got it all wrong...

In the Old Testament, it was actually the Jews that begged the Egyptians to take them into slavery, so they could find the promised land 60 years later.

More recently, it was the Jews that begged the Nazis to murder 6 million of their nation, so that a Jewish state could be formed in Palestine when the war was over ?

Now I'm not saying your wrong Stewart - I wouldn't dare while you're holding that sawn off shotgun the wrong way round - but it's certainly an unconventional view of world events.

Oh hang on I feel an identity change coming on - I'm Scot...Wel...Eng...Iri... Oh, I'm suddenly in a small room. The walls are white. Oh, goodness they're padded as well.

I have lived in England for nearly 17 years now and I feel tthat the Scotland issues are important as a Scot living aboard so to speak. There are may different and varied things that happen north of the border that we do not get to here about in England so while I am not completely in favour of independence I feel that the greater devolvment of powers to the scottish nation is something that needs to be looked at. They talk about us being British however when the BBC talks they use the word England to mean everything not just england they mean Britain as well especially in their sports commentary

Like many people, I have watched with wonder at all the enthusiasm and energy generated by the SNP Government's first 100 days.

Many of us are looking forward with great anticipation to seeing what happens over the next four years.

Every step of the first 100 days has advanced Scotland's interest, and now it is time to give Scots a chance to reflect on the progress and converse about the future of Scotland.

In a way, minority government has been a blessing because it provides the opportunity for a genuinely democratic position to evolve in Parliament.

On our nation’s future, we know where the Scottish Government and indeed I stand – Independence and equality for Scotland. Now it is time to see where the other political parties stand. 

More importantly, it is time to see what the Scottish people want.

It is amazing to think back only four months ago to the front pages of some newspapers, quoting unionist politicians predicting gloom and doom if the public had the temerity to choose a new Government.  

Now, if the same sensationalist charges are foisted on the public by the scaremongers, it will further point out the vacuous nature of their rhetoric.  It is time we had a serious discussion about Scotland's future.

There is a buzz around Scotland – doubly so after James McFadden’s terrific winning goal against France!  Everything is moving forward now in a prudent and consistent way – step by step.  

There seems to be a great sense of relief as the conditioning of the past 50 years of doubt and low expectations gives way to optimism and ambition.

The key part of this national conversation is that it is the people who will decide.  There are alternatives.  Donald Dewar was right – we are on a road, in a process, part of a conversation.  It is time for us to embrace the conversation and move it forward.