The Scottish Government

129 Cheshire

"129. Davie - Cheshire
Wednesday, September 26, 2007 18:34

Ref: 128 below...

"We have been inept, doesn't mean to say we will continue to be and it really doesn't mean that you have to have "Independence" to achieve that. "

Yawn!, horses for courses, dont rock the boat, it will be all right on the night, w'll get there in the end, same old,

Get a grip Davie, its time to grow up, take a chance, stop being so negative.

You state "but the biggest force preventing Scotland moving forward is NOT the union...its the people" true to an extent but the Union is now holding back Scotland.

You've lived to long down south son new Labour is the same animal as the tories and they aint wanted up here.

Be positive, and when your at it try and list the benefit's of this union to the people of Scotland, well can you?

Some simple questions in an attempt to regain focus on the question. Independence - good or bad.

Q1 - What is likely to be better for the Scottish Economy?

A. An independent Scottish Government with fiscal policies focussed on the particular requirements of the Scottish Economy?
B. A UK Westminster Government with no real regard for Scotland, and a fiscal policy focussed on middle England - where the votes come from!

Q2 - What would be better for Scottish business?

A. An independent Scottish Government with the ability to create a business friendly environment in Scotland, and to promote and support what is left of Scotish Industry.
B. A UK government that will stifle growth in Scotland in favour of growth in middle england every time (it's where the votes come from!).

Q3 - What is better for Scottish self belief, motivation, pride and the removal of dependency culture

A. Scottish Independence - akin to growing up and taking responsibility for your own actions.
B. Maintaining a second class role in a downward spiralling "union", and getting what is rightfully ours in the form af a handout. Akin to remaining a disinterested teenager with no purpose, self respect or prospect for fulfillment.

Q4 - What is better for Scotland's "defence" needs

A. An independent Scottish Government which could decide what kind of weaponry was stationed on Scotland soil, and what kind of wars Scottish soldiers should get involved in.
B. A UK Government that regularly bankrupts itself, and kills its own and other nations citizens in pursuing pointless foreign aggression, based on lies and the hangover of Empire.

If you answered mostly A's - there is hope for you and therefore hope for us all.

Mostly B's - what time is Tiffin at the Polo club?

142. gavin thompson - dunfermline

In reply:

Very well written Gavin!
I couldn't agree more with your points raised. I too know many, many supporters of Scottish independence who are not born and bred 'Scots' - they are however, Scottish citizens and can see for themselves the benefits that independence would bring to our country.
Independence has nothing to do with creed or origin, history or hatred and everything to do with the future well being and economic growth of our country and everyone who lives and votes here.

In answer to Davie of Cheshire,missive 126.

Hell Davie

You say 'Scots have consistantly under-utilised the ability of the Parliament to date'.

Yes, but bear in mind, the Parliament has hitherto been controlled by a Unionist Labour party. Also the parliament is beholden to Westminster for its authority and it's budget. 'Holding the purse strings' is a fairly strong disincentive to doing anything radical.

Your diatribe about the SNP is utter nonsense - the fact is we need to end budgetry dependency for a start to make a real difference. Scotland also needs control over a number of other areas to truly take an independent line from the rest of the UK.

Nationalism is about taking real power back to the people of Scotland not flags and singing 'Flower of Scotland'. If thats all you think it is you are a poor deluded fool.

You say we should ditch the nationalists in favour of 'any other party infavour of someone identifying and tackling the real problems....' The tragedy is that none of the other parties are in a position to deal with Scotlands unique problems of poverty and deprivation. The political system prevents any of the British parties giving Scottish problems the real priority they need.

You suggest we just have to wait for a British parties priorities to coincide with Scotlands - we don't, we have the option to change the structure and give Scotland its' own voice again.

You mock the concept of 'Independence in Europe'. Don't you understand, the Scots would much rather share power with the EU, than continue to play to the Westminster tune and be treated like a poor 'idiot' cousin.

You betray the fact that you dislike Europe and the EU, whereas the Scots as a whole abhor this British separatist view. The Scots would welcome a more productive relationship with Europe, which you Unionists tend to fear.

When are you Unionists going to get it through your thick skulls - the British Empire is gone. Britain is no better than any other country in Europe. Can you not just settle for treating other countries, including Scotland with respect. The Scottish nation as a whole are sick of it, Europe is sick of it - the whole damn world is sick of your xenophobic bile.

You ask why Scots living in England or the EU shouldn't be part of the decision regarding independence - I am not opposed to this, but I think you would find that the vast majority of the 20 million in the Scottish diaspora would support an independent Scotland.

Nor should you assume you have to be born in Scotland or have Scottish parents to have the right to participate. Some of the strongest Scottish nationalists I know now living and voting in Scotland, were originally born and bred in the south of England.

They too share our hatred of this 'Britain is best' philosophy that clearly turns you on so much.

You say that the nations of Britain have '...so much more in common than we have against'. We do have a lot in common, but the other countries of the EU have a lot in common as well. Having a 'lot in common' does not mean you give up the right to governing your own country!

I and the majority of Scots do not have in common with you this love of all things British - we would be more comfortable independent and free to respect our neighbours in Europe than despise them as you clearly do. Push comes to shove, the Scots will vote for their nation and independence rather than any outdated notion of the Union and 'being British'. It is you that are naive if you think the Scots are going to put Britain first. The latest election result proves that they won't.

#130. Alistair Hill - Methil Fife and Hildesheim Germany
Wednesday, September 26, 2007 19:14

Alistair where do you get this idea that Britishness is a northern trait and nothing to do with London?

I contend that it is entirely a London invention imposed on Scotland and the rest of the British Empire from Whitehall.
i.e. For those not quite proper 'English'.

The one notable exception being those Ulster folk, loyal to the Queen, who 'are not Irish but British'.

I would respectfully suggest that Scots do not want to be the proud equivalent of any other nation, but EVERY other nation.

Our current population and GDP put us up with, or even ahead of, the likes of Portugal, Austria, Finland and Greece, whereas even the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man have more control over their destiny than we do.

We are important to the UK alright, we give it the critical mass to remain on the G8 and the UN Permanent Security Council.
Whoopdedoo! What benefit has this ever brought us but to put us in the center of a big nuclear bullseye?

We have gone guarantor (unbeknown to us at the time) for the UK economy with North Sea Oil.
This has had Whitehall terrified that the international financial institutions would call in their markers and flush them down the plughole if we found out and took it away.

As for speaking out loudly on the World stage:
With mass communications and internet access it is not who speaks loudest and carries the biggest cudgel who prevails, but the one who speaks the wisest words and carries world opinion.

Otherwise the USA would now dictate international policy for the entire globe would it not?

Until the current Scottish parliament, it has been possible for successive UK leaders, from eg PM Ted Heath negotiating entry to the EEC, to sign away our vital Scottish interests as bargaining chips for the UK national interest.
'Honest' Tony in Libya being but the latest in a long line.
Ask our fishing industry, I was going to add mining, shipbuilding and iron & steel industries but it is too late for those whose livelihoods depended on Whitehall or Holyrood looking out for them.

I note that road equivalent tariffs for our lifeline island ferries have suddenly been freed from EU competition rules simply by a change in Scottish administration.

Just shows what can be done with your own people ready, willing and able to speak up for you, rather than hoping for an invite to listen in next door.

450-500 states?
Deary me, you're not another of the conspiracy theorists who believe that the EU is a device of the Germans or secret world capitalist conspirators to break up 'England' into ten or more regional chunks to facilitate creating some kind of economic Fourth Reich?

Aye well...

In answer to Davie of Cheshire , missive 129

Hello Davie

I completely agree with you that a lot of our problems are down to us Scots ourselves not taking responsibility.

But can't you see, that the move towards independence is all about Scotswanting to do just that - take responsibility for their own problems and solve them.

Devolution does not provide sufficient powers for us to do this now - ie no proper tax raising powers etc - so follow the logic of your own argument and vote for independence !!!!!!!!!!!!

Awrabest

#136. Jean Henretty - Aberdeenshire
Friday, September 28, 2007 13:50

Perhaps you told somebody 'no to independence' but independence was not on the ballot papers in May.

It will be at the next UK general election though.

It may have escaped your attention but our schools and hospitals spending is constrained by the amount of dole money we are provided with under the Barnett Formula.

ie 'Here's a bawbee and don't spend it all in the one shop'

One argument is that with Scotland able to operate the levers of her own economy to her own advantage, rather than accept the south of Britain's hand me down policies, we could grow Scotland's economy more efficiently and effectively.
http://www.adamsmith.org/images/uploads/publications/Independent_Scotland_Riches.pdf

According to the Adam Smith Institute (link posted above) for example, that would fund the improvements for everyone in Scotland to enjoy a better standard of living.

Isn't that what we all want?

Nothing to do with Medieval or Picto-Scottish history.

#113. George Steel - Fife
Wednesday, September 19, 2007 13:40

What a nasty, bitter, wee man you must be?
If you feel the urge to have a go at one of the most popular Scotsmen in history, might I suggest you first get your facts straight?

First, Sir Thomas Sean O'Connery is a Knight Bachelor of the Order of the British Empire; it is the step up from OBE but not an order of chivalry like the Garter or the Thistle.
Whether or not it is an English honour depends on how you define 'British'.

Sir Sean is a permanent resident of Lyford Cay, Bahamas.
The Bahamas were granted independence from Great Britain in 1964 but still retain the Queen as head of state.

He-haw to do with America, unless you want to count the tourist dollars spent there by Americans.

As for contributing to the land of his birth:
In 1971 he donated his entire salary, over £1 million, (a 3 bedroom house could be bought back then for £200-£400) from his Bond film Diamonds Are Forever to the Scottish International Educational Trust that he co-founded.

'SIET' has granted £millions in scholarships to young Scots and Scottish institutions, assisting talented and worthy individuals who need help to achieve their educational objectives.

His American based charity
'Friends of Scotland' was formed,
"… To create, stimulate, and sustain an interest in Scotland and its history, traditions, and culture; to bring together people of Scottish heritage; to promote goodwill and understanding about Scotland among the general public; and to perform charitable works…"
Sir Sean serves as Honorary Chairman.

On Tax, let the big man answer for himself:

The Sunday Times
March 12, 2006
Jasper Gerard interviews Sean Connery:
>>>If Scotland is so bonny, why are you never there? “I am in St Andrews every year,” he chips back.
But not, one presumes, as a taxpayer?

“I pay more tax in the UK than most MPs put together,” he erupts,...

... So if he is not, as reported, a “tax exile”, why won't he come home?
“Well, what kind of life would I have with tabloids following me?
That is down to you guys in the media.

I brought 95 people over to Scotland and held the world premiere for a movie called Entrapment, and tabloids put their heavies in the hotel just to upset me.” <<<

Your ideas on the 2:1 issues regards Scottish opinion of the constitution are well-covered elsewhere.

Your comment about American interest in N.Ireland speaks volumes about your own particular bias, brother.

That fact that large tracts of Scotland are uninhabited does not mean that they were always so.
For 'foreigners of Scottish descent'
I suggest The Heritable Jurisdictions (Scotland) Act, 1746 (20 Geo 2 c 43) for further reading and 'The Highland Clearances'
. http://www.highlandclearances.info/

As for who lives where, and where they come from, that is entirely irrelevant to Scotland's restoration to full nationhood or for that, this 'conversation'.

Why would you laughably imagine we'd have to kiss our relatives in England goodbye after independence?

If only unionists like you would be more vocal, Scotland would be independent so much sooner.

[133] I sincerely hope that none of my posts have given the impression that “independence is some magical cure, a cure which will solve all of Scotland's socio-economic ills”. In fact, I believe that Independence will pose significant short-term challenges for Scotland and I trust that anyone who has read my posts has not been misled in this regard and will recognize that, as with life itself, there are no guarantees. However, to change Scotland’s relatively poor socio-economic performance over the last thirty years (as evidenced by various independent reports) also presents significant challenges that so far the Unionist parties, and in particular the Labour Party, have not been able to overcome.

Perhaps having worked abroad in a number of countries and travelled extensively during this period gives me an ‘advantage’ over some, who perhaps have only travelled abroad on holiday or on short business trips, in that possibly I have been allowed to view Scotland’s performance over time more from a distance (and perhaps more objectively through being removed from the British media) and allowed to compare it, first-hand, with the progress of many other countries. Certainly my own experience was that although I was essentially pro-Union, and perhaps anti-EU when I first went to live abroad, I gradually became more persuaded of Independence as I learned more about the progress of other countries and also about the success of other Scots in helping to make that progress across all aspects of socio-economic development.

Having said this, I will repeat what I have said previously in that I can still also agree positive arguments for retaining the Union but these are all founded on the UK first withdrawing from the EU. As none of the major British political parties are advocating this separation, then the only logical path I can personally see to providing today’s children with better prospects for the future within Scotland than were presented to my generation, is for Scotland to forge its own path in the world, initially at least, as a participating independent member country of the EU. This does not mean trying to change history or cutting off ties with our families and friends in England (which I’m sure are important to all of us, even members of the SNP) but it does mean taking a long term view of Scotland’s future.

Of course everyone’s natural instincts are to avoid difficulties, especially if some pain may appear to be involved, and some would even rather forego a life-saving operation than agree to a one-off but painful injection, so it is up to those who are perhaps in a position to provide more objective assessments to attempt to put such dilemmas in perspective. Certainly I cannot claim that my own perspective necessarily provides the best possible judgement in the complex issues surrounding Independence, but what I can say is that through my own experiences I am now confident that overall Scotland will progress faster in realising the aspirations of its people over the next thirty years with a government independent of Westminster, and focussed on Scottish Solutions for Scottish issues, than by sustaining what appears to be a growing ‘dependency culture’ within the Union.

There is no doubt that many still derive a certain ‘comfort’ from their association with things British (and I cannot deny that thumbing through some of my old and well-worn British passports endorses this feeling), but I think even the most ardent supporters of the Union would admit that the international standing of ‘Brand Britain’ has fallen in recent times with the waning of the British Empire, the increasing influence of other countries in the global economy (such as Japan, China and now India), and our association with the conflict in Iraq. Perhaps now is the right time for all four participants in the Union to draw a line in the sand and seek to map out their own destinies in a ‘brave new world’!

The Independance movement appear to want to return to the 14th century why not go further. As a McAlpine I was taught how the Scots of the West joined the other tribes to form a stronger force to keep out the Norse. Should we return to our ancient tribal lands that the Roman's knew, a land of numerous tribes that were given an artificial boundary.
Scotland is a nation constructed by feudal landowners and warlords and does not represent the culture or identity of the people.
I am Scottish and proud of it but do not need a government to prove it.
The Scottish Executive should get on with the job it is paid to do, spend our taxes wisely. Not interfere in cultural identity. Throughout history nationalism has ended in tears and bloodshed.
Politicians are meant to be wise, for goodness sake gie us a break and fix the schools and hospitals and stop wasting time and money on this petty conversation. We spoke to you in May and told you, no to Independance.