The Scottish Government

FROM THE HEAD AND FROM THE HEART ONLY INDEPENDENCE. ITS NATURAL AND ITS RIGHT I CAN NOT BEGIN TO SEE THE CASE FOR THE UNION. ITS DEAD IN THE WATER.

210. Stuart Rivans - good posting, and yes, Alex Salmond should stay "softly softly" you catch more bees with honey

(never did understand that expresion!). Don't forget RET, I've wondered for years why RET disappeared from the curriculum, glad to see it back. Only thing is Calmac and others would need to double their fleets in a hurry.

209. Kevpb - Cold War. 1914-18 WWI, 21 years of tension later 1939-1945 WWII, 62 years of tension later no WWIII,

but a succession of "theater conflicts" including the mess the West left the Middle East, and uprisings in USSR

"satellite countries" any of which could have led to WWIII. I personally believe the nuclear deterrent prevented

that global conflict.

207. Gordon Murray:
1). Agreed; unfortunately we do need energy, and for decades ignorance and politics (same thing!) has led to

under-research and lack of investment. Short term only, we're already late building new nuclear stations, I think

Hunterston and Torness are due to reach the end of their lives 2020 or so, and alternative sources can not meet our

needs for a long time to come. Toxic waste - this needs a lot more money thrown at it globally, and perhaps fusion a la Back to the Future could be an answer - chuck in a block of irradiated concrete, light a city for a day. At last fusion is on its way again with a bit more funds (Iter programme in Cadarache), perhaps if more money had been

thrown at our own guys in Culham we'd be further along already. Unfortunately it's likely to be 30-50 years before

we'll see benefits, so medium term we need to maturely consider all power sources to fill the gap, including dirty

nuclear. As for the "baddies", the Soviets considered us to be the baddies, and were just as frightened of us as we

were of them. Even now, Russsian Nuclear missiles in Cuba = American Nuclear missiles in Poland and the Czech

Republic, very recently RAF intercepts eight Russian bombers as Putin provokes West

(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2400345.ece), Cold War II. Note, by the way, the one-sided

rhetoric "Putin provokes West", rather than the other way around about the American missile defence shield. Let's all take sides and refuse to empathise with the other side's POV. Back to my tin hat and gun, though a bit further East now!

2). Love to dump the nukes. My house at 20 ft above sea level would have been 80 ft under water if Holy Loch had

been obliterated. An independent Scotland would have to consider our position in Nato, and wrt to mutual defence

treaties or whatever with the remains of the UK. It might take a time to dump the nukes and allow alternative

relocation of suitable geographical maintenance facilities. The ideal has to marry the pragmatic.

3). I guess you agree with my point as you attacked the poster, not the posting (i.e. an ad hominem).

4). "Retain the Union". Ummmm, I guess you got me mixed up. Mine and my wife's vote were 2 of the 42 majority for

SNP in North Ayrshire, which we would claim put the SNP in government, even though plainly I don't support all SNP policies. The strength of my support for independence greatly outweighed my dislike of the SNP's nuclear and "stay in the EU" policies, but now at last is the time Independence will probably happen and we control our own destiny. "Newest Nation". In the eyes of the world we'd be the 195th nation / country or thereabouts (http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/scotlandnot.htm), and the newest.

As a different point offers were made to other parties to share in govenmental positions; these were rejected and I can understand that motivations for these offers could be suspected, possibly justifiably. I'd like to see these offers regularly repeated and soon accepted. In Scotland we need the best people in government, whether devolved or

independent, regardless of party or political persuasion. I'd also like to see a complete discardment of the "whip"

in British politics, and not to see its use in Scotland. Elected MPs, MSPs, MEPs should vote according to

constituents and beliefs, not party politics.

(Last long posting, honest .gov)

[205] “In today’s ever smaller world, of globalisation and the like, it makes no sense for the countries which make up the British Isles to go their separate ways. We have a proud history, we have shared customs and common values why waste that?”

Please let me ‘beg to differ’ - it is precisely because the world has changed and globalization has opened up more direct links to many international markets that it is sensible for the countries which make up the British Isles to go their “separate ways”, assuming of course the UK is not likely to split from the EU in the foreseeable future!

Let me support this proposition by posing a couple of questions:

1. As more and more of our legislation is passed to Brussels, and Westminster has less and less say in the day-to-day running of our lives, at what point will you decide that government via Westminster is effectively irrelevant, or do you simply prefer to indefinitely have three tiers of government along with all the attendant bureaucracy and costs that will effectively diminish monies available for public services and desirable future Scottish projects?
2. If you are not working for the government so are more likely to be ambivalent about a possible need for three tiers of government (not including our local councils of course), should Scotland wait longer before it seeks Independence while our economic growth struggles to match that of our competitors (never mind the UK average over the last thirty years) and the UK runs up even more debt, sells the last of our gold reserves, and drains more of our natural resources, such as oil and gas, while at the same time funding major UK infrastructure projects in the South East of England (Chunnel, Dome, Cross-Rail, Olympics, etc)?
3. Do you really think Britain today has the influence it enjoyed up to the middle of the last century and do you seriously think that away from the coat-tails of the US, and outside of the possible deployment of nuclear weapons, that the UK is likely to continue to ‘punch above its weight’ politically in tomorrow’s world?

If citizens of the UK are not given a referendum on the new ‘Constitution’ (sorry ‘Agreement’) now, it is likely to be a long long time, if ever, before our continuing membership of the EU is voted on, so, if we are realistic, we must conclude that the erosion of UK ‘sovereignty’ will diminish for the foreseeable future. Therefore, logic would seem to suggest there is no time to lose in going our own “separate way” and voting for Independence if we wish to give Scotland a stronger voice in Europe and more direct control over its role within Europe, and beyond.

Our “shared customs” and common values we have developed together within Britain, if important to us and future generations, will not be “wasted”, but will survive whatever Scotland’s constitutional state, and as two (or more) countries in an increasingly influential EU we can help to infuse these values in future EU policies and administration and thereby positively supplement any independent influence we may have in our ever-changing world!

Three hundred years is a long time. Do you not think we owe it to our children to at least spend a little bit of our time to attempt to objectively evaluate what constitutional arrangements will best serve Scotland in the “smaller world” you have referred to in the coming centuries, without the overriding imposition of current emotional attachments to an increasingly irrelevant Union?

hahaha-ha-ha. to all those people who said the SNP couldnae dae it...! The SNP GOVERNMENT has achieved more in 6 months in power than Jack McConell did for Scotland in 8 YEARS!Why would we want a Labour Government in power that can't even COUNT?? First of all they cant seem to garsp the fact that even if the SNP recruits only 1 police officer it's still 1 more than Labour did. Secondly, the Labour Government in Westminster can't even count the number of people in their country. And who exactly would trust that mathematically challenged westminster Government with the future of our Scottish nation?
Th anti scottish bias in the media here is terrifying but the SNP seem to consistently rise above it. MAYBE THAT'S BECAUSE WITH EVERY DAY IN gOVERNMENT THEY PROVE TAHT THEY ARE THE ONLY PARTY WITH scotland's INTERESTS AT HEART. INDEPENDENCE? BRING IT ON AND THE SOONER THE BETTER!

Just go for it!

Which self-respecting nation would not want to be in control of its own affairs? So either we are not a nation; or we have long since lost all self respect.

I still can't believe we have an SNP government in Scotland, having spent the last 40 years waiting for it!!
Alex Salmond & his team have done brilliantly so far, but let us not forget the nitty gritty of the budget is still to come. That said, Scotland is, & always has been perfectly capable of governing itself. Now we are no longer shackled to Labour at Westminster, things can only improve

I am sick and tired of reading the English rant that they are subsidising Scotland and the Scots. If they are so angry and upset about this, then why in the past, have they continually opposed an independant Scottish nation? Maybe it is because of the Scottish oil revenue? And if you want to argue that it is not Scotland's oil or it will eventually run out then go ahead... because we will still have our other national liquid to keep us going.... Is it not the case that on Islay alone (and last time I looked Islay was definately Scottish) there is more tax revenue stored in whiskey vats than the gold reserve in the Bank of England! Scotland is a country of massive natural resources. Scotland's education and legal systems have been the envy of other nations for years, Kenny MacAskill's plans to change the laws on litigation will further enhance our standing on the world legal stage. Scotland has the intellect and the resources to stand alone and be a proud independant nation. All it needs is the public confidence. If the unionists want so much to be a part of England then that is their choice. But it is a choice many Scots don't want forced upon them.

"Scotland the Brave" by Cliff Hanley

Hark when the night is falling
Hear! hear the pipes are calling,
Loudly and proudly calling,
Down thro' the glen.
There where the hills are sleeping,
Now feel the blood a-leaping,
High as the spirits
of the old Highland men.



Chorus
Towering in gallant fame,
Scotland my mountain hame,
High may your proud
standard gloriously wave,
Land of my high endeavour,
Land of the shining rivers,
Land of my heart for ever,
Scotland the brave.



High in the misty Highlands,
Out by the purple islands,
Brave are the hearts that beat
Beneath Scottish skies.
Wild are the winds to meet you,
Staunch are the friends that greet you,
Kind as the love that shines
from fair maidens' eyes.



Chorus



Far off in sunlit places,
Sad are the Scottish faces,
Yearning to feel the kiss
Of sweet Scottish rain.
Where tropic skies are beaming,
Love sets the heart a-dreaming,
Longing and dreaming for the homeland again.



Chorus


Please can we have this as the National Anthem

The principle of independence is now gaining momentum and the focus now needs to change - the justification for unification has now moved to suggest "how" Scotland would operate within a UK that would require to have common aims for defence, NHS etc. SNP must now set out its intentions for that - use models like Scandinavia or the Baltics or clusters of other EU countries. These examples show independent countries with joint borders (as Scotland would with England) but they are still, and would consider no alternative to, being independent countries. The whole of the UK needs to be educated on how such an arrangement in the UK would operate - we need to completely undermine those who would seek to lie and scare by suggesting border guards and cut off relatives - the other EU countries manage fine - that message needs to be more clearly communicated. It needs to be set out in a manner that even the Sun and the Mail can understand - the overgrown teenager in the parental nest. Now he is moving to his own place - it doesn't mean he wont see his parents any more, they can all visit each other - but you would surely not advocate that he lives his entire life in the spare room?
On a serious note - the Scandinavians and the Baltics have good examples of how they work together on common issues and we need to set out how the same could work in the UK - so that when Wales and Ireland decide that they are ready, the framework is already in place. We need to make clear that we have thought through the whole process and have a structure in mind.