The Scottish Government

I love Scotland, I wish you independence and a little more nice weather.

When I come home now I cant help but notice the change in Scotland. So far the SNP have invigorated scotland, I have no Idea whats next but we now have a council of economic advisors (thought we probably already had one)looking into scotlands economic developement. Why didnt Labour do this in their 8 years of power. Truth is an increase in scotlands economic performance would lead to increases in Scottish taxes going to westminster for the benefit of Westminster with nothing more coming back to scotland, It would be hard to argue against Independence then and Mc-connel and co were told to keep Scotland as is. Weve had Our poor farmers struggle with the F+M restrictions from DEFRA but with no government support, at least these DEFRA powers should be devolved to stop this riduculous situation, scotland pays taxes to support DEFRA but DEFRA only supports English farmers in time of crisis, where are the labour politicians in scotland now were is their voice, the Welsh labour mps are furious. Ours are keeping their mouths shut. As for the national grid going to charge more for remote sited offshore wind and wave powered electricity, this has to be a joke. Are they going to build a new nuclear powered generator in the heart of London. All existing nuclear powered generators are in remote areas for good reason, do they have to pay an extra charge??? So far the SNP has fought for scotlands voice on all of these issues, Swinney even managed to get 1 billion of scots taxes back from the treasury, this was denied to the useless Labour numpties we had before, they either didnt fight hard enough, good enough or just did what they were told in interests of their carear rather than the interests of their voters. This would be the same for Tories and the Lib dems. Independance cant come quick enough for me, but in answering the the economic question perhaps it would be more prudent to increase scotlands economic performance first to increase confidence in the New Scotland before Independance.

As an Englishman who has chosen to live in Shetland, and who previously lived for many years in Scotland, I have mixed feelings. I firmly believe in self determination and as such would not argue against independence if that is what the majority want (and equally feel for the Tibetans and Kurds amongst many others).
Here in Shetland our history is different to the rest of Scotland - the islands were effectively mortgaged to Scotland some 500 years ago so there is no heritage of kilts, bagpipes or other similar tourist trappings. The people here have never spoken gaelic and have no wish to do so. The local dialect contains the remains of Norn - an ancient Scandanavian language - mixed with English and Scots.
I belive that in a referendum the majority in Shetland would vote against independence (there is a local feeling amongst some that rule from Edinburgh is as irrelevant to us as rule from London!) - but should it occur can we then vote for independence from Scotland?

In my humble opinion its high time some severely misled "unionists" should pick up their history books and read the real history of Scotland,not the Anglo British clap trap we've been fed in our schools since the union.
To express my entire views here would take far too much time,but suffice to say,the last "English" invasion wasn't in 1745/46 but in 1919 when 10,000 English troops were put into Glasgow with their tanks and machine guns etc to quell the so called "Red Clydeside" riots and weren't a kick in the shirt off using them. The Scottish troops were locked in their barracks so that they wouldn't get involved on behalf of their own kith and kin. Now wasn't that a great thanks from a London government to Scotland whose people had given approximately 20% of the UK 1st world war casualties with 10% of the UK population in the preceding 1914-1918. Bet you didn't get that at school unionist people ??.
Teach our kids the real Scottish history in schools,not lies and not slanted in any direction,just the truth. Scotland would be independant in a generation.
Finally ,I agree with David Robertson of Inverness. If we do achieve independance then our relationship with europe should be re-examined, I sometimes wonder at Ireland, fought for so long to gain her independance from London misrule then handed her lot to Brussels ?? That decision may well come back to bite her in the backside yet.
Personally I'd prefer the Norwegian model. On our own,minding our own business and being friendly with the neighbours....including the English.
If you think you live in a "free" country at present....dream on.....
DAVY

Hi Gordon

I must say that I don’t really know what to make of your last thread. I mean in the space of about 500 words or so you have spoken about snowmen, the American civil war, English football commentators, cricket, Mel Gibson and Brigadoon!

The points you make are equally confusing. Indeed, you claim that Australians have, until recently, been found of their British heritage. Fair enough. But when you point to Australian Christmas cards to back up your claim your argument loses all credibility.

I would also say that Americans, for the most part, do not take pride in their British forefathers. Their interest is borne out of nothing more than historical curiosity. Do you think they really care that one of their grannies came from Aberdeen in the 1750s?

You also say that you have no real affection for 'Great Britain'. Again, fair enough. But I would just like to remind you are not ruled by 'Great Britain'. Like it or not you are actually a part of it. Irony ehh.

So you see there’s not much that we agree on. Although I take your point regarding English football commentators!

Cheers

I personally would love to see Scotland gain independance I am sick of our country being used as a place of experiment for the English, I also feel independance is long over due thanks to historic grudges Scotland have with England vice versa I feel independance would make Scottish people feel more proud of their country and give them fresh motivation to do well for their people. We just want a say in what goes on in our country. I thought suppression was a thing of the past but it's very much in the heart of Scotland

Independence For Scotland has always been dream, hasn't it. A vent for anger. And now the dream is becoming reality, where would we vent?!

Reading these arguements, trying my best to be rational, childhood teachings from the older, 'wiser' generations often dragging me otherwise.

To be nieve, on a political level, as one would on a personal level, I reckon a country, such as Scotland, should put itself first and see it can function and then in time help others.
A healthy humour (although I think of bittersweet...?) and healthy boundaries from toxic situations make happy people. Scotland must feel authentic and whole.

On my other foot I see the nightmare before me of one huge overcrowded Central Belt city, with tower blocks near the foot of a Glen once this little country shaky on its feet is put to the world. Maybe it is better to shush and still be a precious gem undiscovered.

But one (paranoid!) nightmare shouldn't put off realising a dream and as unpolitical as I sound, I think it might be time for Scotland and England to go off on their merry ways!

For Scotland, I reckon we can take it in our stride. Around me most of my friends jump at the chance to say they are Scottish before anyone presumes otherwise! It would be nice to hear it said without so much forced national pride. More so because the country we live in is run by a genuinely fair, diverse government. I don't get the feeling it is right now. Everyone says we should stop being bitter about the past. But the past is the past, and like a bitter childhood, should we not learn and grow from it?

175. Craig Cook - Glasgow
Monday, October 15, 2007 13:06

An interesting insight into the mindset of the unionist. Thank you.

I do not see any fault in Australians being proud of their own history and culture, the British bits and all.

Up until fairly recently Australians would send christmas cards with snowmen, robins and jolly Santas with white beard and fur lined red outfit when December in Oz is the middle of their summer, and many Australian kids have never even seen snow never mind built a snowman.

Would you say modern Australians have issues with ‘the British’ or just the Pommy B’s?

My cousins over there tell me that Scots are seldom ever called 'Poms' and that the Pom is more a certain mindset.

I would say that even the Americans take some pride in their British colonial forefathers and our shared roots.

That, in spite of having had to spill British blood to obtain their nationhood, there is I believe affection for 'the old country'.
Mind you there are quite a number of those for Americans, not just Scotland, England and Ireland.

I noticed that on the Post Office building in Dublin they still have the old royal cipher, along with the bullet marks, even though the 'Union Jack' was conspicuously absent among the many flags of the world flying there the last time I visited the fair city.

I have no great affection for 'Great Britain' and, like the greatest proportion of the population of the planet, do not wish my country to be ruled by Britannia even if she has built roads and bridges for us.

I do however like England and the English, well, most of the ones that I've known or am related to.
Then again I can't say that I've been completely taken by a number of Scots whose acquaintance I have made.

The one exception I plead guilty to strong emotions against would be the condescending 'British' sports commentator, you know the ones.

I trust I do not need to explain further on this forum, but most Scots will cringe at the comment and commentary from London based mouthpieces, even one born in Ulster who'll take it upon himself to get angry at Scots who would boo at, or not join in singing ‘God save the Queen’.

I have enjoyed sunny English afternoons watching cricket with friends on the green, with a pie, a sandwich and a beer or two.
English village life and culture I have found distinctive, thoroughly civilised and especially pleasant, once they have had time to get used to my Scottish accent.

More than once an attractive English lady has had me thinking ‘I musht be dreaming’ when my accent was compared to Sir Sean C, when there was me thinking I sounded more like Rab C.

Ah, fond memories.

That Mel Gibson movie, I take it that you are aware of the fate of yon statue below the Wallace monument?

I think too many unionists are on a guilt trip because of that particular piece of Hollywood hokum, because to me they are the only ones who ever seem to be watching it or keep referring to it.

I watched Brigadoon, some of it, but I never did feel that urge to go find Bonny Jean.

Young Scots may be disproportionately impressed by seeing Scotland portrayed on screen because they are not exposed at school to their own history and culture.
I am told, according to their teachers, the reason it is not better taught is: 'that it is too boring'.

Now come to think of it, I like the BBC's Last night of the Proms and 'Land of Hope and Glory'.
Great tune, shame about the lyrics.

Different kind of nationalism though, isn't it?

Let's get down to facts: Scottish independence without Scottish freedom would be a sham. There is no advantage in being independent, only for power to remain concentrated in a secretive, remote, unaccountable Cabinet.

The real challenge, and allure, of independence is the opportunity it gives us to reshape our constitutional system and to establish a well-balanced liberal-democracy in Scotland.

The SNP has already made some progress in this area. The proposed Constitution (set out in a 2002 Policy Paper) would be a considerable improvement over the existing system. There would be a fixed-term unicameral Parliament chosen by proportional representation, an executive chosen by and accountable to Parliament, an independent judiciary chosen by a Judicial Appointments Commission, parliamentary control over declarations of war and treaty-making, a guaranteed role for local government, and a bill of rights. There would even be a mechanism enabling a two-fifths minority of the members of Parliament to suspend legislation, unless the majority appeals to the people in a referendum - a very good protection against the abuse of majority power.

However,having studied the document in detail, it appears deficient in a number of respects. The mechanism for chosing and removing a Prime Minister is not clearly stated: it relies too much on vague conventions of "confidence", but experience shows that the current Holyrood system of formal election by Parliament is superior. The bill of rights is lacking: there is no guarantee of trial by jury, for example. There are insufficient means of holding the government to account: no provision for an Auditor General or an Ombudsman.

It seems there is much we in Scotland could learn from our Scandinavian neighbours. In Sweden there is a parliamentary Foreign Affairs Council, which gives parliamentarians privileged access to the government's foreign policy decisions. There is also a strong freedom of information rule, and a powerful ombudsman to protect people against misgovernment. All these provisions could easily, and beneficially, be incorporated in a future Scottish constitution.

Consideration should also be given to futher strengthening the role of local governments, both as a means of promoting good government and as a bulwark against the abuse of power concentrated at the centre. We have no shortage of good ideas here: directly elected Lord Provosts, provision for triggering local referenda by petition, bringing back the Burghs, and improving the public accountability of the police and education systems through directly elected police boards and school boards.

Furthermore, a future Scottish Constitution must regulate the form and the use of Scotland's armed forces. The Scandinavian states rely for their home defence upon a volunteer home-guard service (in addition to small regular armed forces on a defensive posture). A home guard service in Scotland, which could be used as an aid-to-civil power in the event of natural disasters, fire service strikes etc, would be a soundly liberal-democratic and civic response to Scotland's unambitious defence needs.

Finally, some further consideration must be given to the role of the British head of State as King/Queen of Scots? Do we really want a foreign absentee landlord - even as a figurehead? I believe that the Swedish approach, of giving the Speaker/Presiding Officer the formal powers normally belonging to the Head of State would be a good way ahead. Then the few residual ceremonial duties of the monarchy could then be transfered, without any upheaval, to the Presiding Officer.

Post #175 Craig Cook

"I know you’re a nationalist and all that but can I ask out of curiosity if there is anything about Britain which you like? I just always wanted to ask a nationalist that."

Although I would hesitate to call myself a "nationalist", not liking the habit of sticking labels on people, I certainly support the idea of a completely independent Scotland, not cut off from the rest of Britain but governing herself fully and conducting her relationships with other nations, and groups of nations, as an independent political entity.

Britain is of course an idea that has served as a rallying point for many generations of Scots and it is difficult to imagine that most Scots do not feel some attachment to that idea, even today.

The government of Britain is presently going through an exercise to try to define what it means to be British and there is even talk of listing the values so discovered on UK passports. In this way I suspect they are trying to redefine rather than define the nature of Britain, which has changed considerably over the past fifty years or so. No doubt we shall then be subjected to classes on "being British" based on the outcome of these seminars, citizens' juries and focus groups.

So, it would appear that there are many who feel that the idea of Britishness is perhaps a little worn at the edges and in need of rejuvenation. But in doing so they are destroying, in my opinion, the very essence of the Britain that I loved. When I was growing up in Edinburgh, in the 1940s and 1950s, there was only Britain, Scotland was in a very distant second place. There were local tribalist attachments but the foundation of my education and cultural influences were all British. To say that I dislike Britain would leave me disliking my childhood and all the happy memories associated with it. The idea of Britain suggested to me, inter alia, freedom. courage, justice, and a willingness to sacrifice oneself to make the world a better place. Those are the values I embraced as a child as being British. Although I still embrace those qualities today, I have come to recognise that they are actually Christian qualities and as Britain has become a post Christian society these qualities are no longer admired as being central to the idea of Britain. Would that they were. So, I would suggest that the dissatisfaction many in people feel in the Britain of today is simply a recognition that we have lost our soul. Will Scottish independence give it back to us? I doubt it. In this respect any fervent belief that an independent Scotland would bestow meaning on her citizens is, in my opinion, doomed to disappointment. This answer is only one voice and I know there are many others who will give a different view and that is a good thing.