The Scottish Government

PS As someone who has returned to Scotland from living overseas and who is paying UK taxes, my comments posted in #114 also apply to the 'contributor' of 113, although I would drop the use of the word 'eloquent'!

[108] In spite of your sometimes eloquent words you have still not provided any reasoning to suggest that Scotland's relative decline of recent decades is going to be reversed if we remain in the Union. The current 'marriage', I would respectfully suggest, may suit you personally, but I would also suggest that there are many in Scotland who would wish a brighter future than you are perhaps offering by wishing to remain in an outdated and costly relationship (am not just talking about cost of an additional tier of government but the lack of influence on specifically Scottish issues and the loss of the aspirations of some to pursue career, family and/or business objectives in a country where overall financial control resides elsewhere) that has been superseded by our increasing participation in the EU and the rapidly evolving global economy.

Of course like everyone else you are entitled to your own views, but I hope that these will now extend to enlightening us on what changes you would propose within a continuing Union that will fundamentally change Scotland’s direction and allow us to match, if not exceed, the progress in socio-economic terms of those countries (many with a similar population base to Scotland) that most would agree have advanced significantly over the last twenty to thirty years?

Or, perhaps you believed those politicians who repeatedly declared that we are doing fantastically well in all areas and, overall, already are “the best small country in the world” – if this is the case I would suggest that you take off your sunglasses and either do some more reading of truly independent reports or plan a little more international travel (with the minimum carbon footprint of course)!


[109] It is perhaps not surprising with years of Labour government at all levels in Scotland to see such cynicism expressed in this ‘conversation’, but perhaps what you are in effect saying is that it is indeed ‘time for change’!

#100, #101 and other foreign interventionists.

Isn't it amazing how distance fog's the vision and at the same time crystalises the view on independence with a clarity that belies the truth. May I say a big 'NO THANK YOU' to SIR Sean, (is that an ENGLISH title?) and would it go if Scotland achieved independence?, and a double 'NO THANK YOU', 'NO THANK YOU', to our American friend with the big hooter, who can smell independence from over 3,000 miles away. If you want independence for Scotland, come and live here and pay our taxes! For your information your opinion is a minority opinion here by a majority of 2 to 1. We well remember the contribution American dollars made to to maintain the bloodshed in NI, so your intervention in this area is not welcome.

Scotland has a population of 5,000,000 (10% of the English / Welsh) people and has a land mass comprising one third (33%) of the British isles. The reason for this is quite simple, a large percentage of our land mass is uninhabitable making it unsuitable for exploitation in a farming sense. It follows then that a large proportion of our population has to make a living outside our borders, which accounts for the large numbers of foreigners of Scottish descent. While they are welcome to come and visit and research their roots, they should remember that their ancestors, for the most part, left Scotland of their own accord, to make their lives in foreign fields, (including ENGLAND). In fact there are twice as many people living over the border of Scottish descent, than live in Scotland, do we wish to kiss them 'Goobye' also, or do we want them to come home? Good luck and God Bless to all of them. I think we do a lot better at exploiting the the English than they do at exploiting us!!

We are doing quite well without you so kindly but out!!

I can smell the clean Air of INDEPENDENCE from over here. Go for it SCOTLAND!

Well what do you know - what a coincidence Sir SSHaun get the number 100 slot for his contribution. So who's manipulating this show I wonder? Another example of the SNP letting people with money dictate the priorities, regardles of where they pay their local income tax. I wonder what slot Brian Souter has claimed? Lets just wait and see how they manipulate this conversation as it unfolds. Bah and Humbug to the lot of these seperatists in thier pretence of improving Scotlands lot apart from the United Kingdom.

Gavin Thompson - You appear to have gotten yourself a bit confused with regards to my national identity. I see myself as both Scottish/British because of the pride I take from our collective achievements and the cultural/historic ties which bond the people of these isles together. I’ll leave that at that.

You also appear to have a 'them and us' mentality. Westminster is not run by the English for the English. The Commons/Lords are made up of men and women from every corner of the British Isles, men and women who legislate for all the British people not just the English. What you have said is just typical of the nationalist rhetoric uttered throughout the years - rhetoric used to foster an air of mistrust amongst Scots towards the British state. It is the sort of stuff Alex Salmond used to utter from his office at Westminster.

You have also confused national identity with political inequality. It is wrong to say that by virtue of their larger population the English identity is superior. If however you are talking about political inequality would you not agree that devolution has addressed this? Lets not forget that 'London' Labour granted the Scottish people significant powers to legislate for ourselves in the areas which effect our lives most. And lets also get one thing clear the 'political dependence' you speak of has not just been eroded by the devolution settlement it has been significantly eroded.

You also question my emotional attachment to the union and suggest that nothing would change if a political settlement were to be reached. Don’t be so naïve! Of course things would change. I mean that’s what independence is all about is it not? Taking Scotland in a new direction, one which would diverge from other Britons? This new path would not just be a political one – indeed with 300 years of cultural and historic ties broken we would diverge from other Britons in other ways too.

Moving on, when Scotland was absorbed into a union with England/Wales she did not disappear. We did not become North Briton. Instead we became part of a much larger and more powerful body within which we retained our own identity - an identity which was later fused with Britishness, to a degree at least. Now you claim that in an independent Scotland I could still celebrate my Britishness. Is this an attempt at humour? Britain will not be fused into a larger body instead it will be carved up. How I ask can you celebrate something which would no longer exist?

Now you ask how I would know if the extension of power threatened the union. That is a difficult question to answer but I suppose it would involve the extension of so much power that the continued existence of the British state was called into question. You are also wrong when you say that unionist parties now feel that Holyrood’s powers are not extensive enough. Their scramble to secure more power for parliament is nothing more than an attempt to seem more pro-Scottish than the Nats.

I would like to leave you with some words Munro Fraser (a big bad Tory). I don’t care for the Tories much but what he said made sense to me. He said: ‘The best analogy I can give is to compare the Union to a marriage… I do not sit down every year with my accountant and work out whether marriage has been to my financial benefit, and on that assessment decide whether to sue for divorce. It is in fact quite irrelevant to me whether I am better off married or not. I am married for all sorts of other reasons…but it is primarily for the support, the comfort and companionship that most people wish to be married…

I shall now turn my sights to Sir Sean…only kidding big yin!

The Voters of Scotland Have had their say Independance NOW

I would welcome Scottish Independence.

The national conversation document launched by the SNP states "Scotland is a recognised political and territorial entitry, with its own legal system, borders and other independent institutions...it's territorial extent is not disputed".
As a recognised nation, I feel we should have the authority to govern ourselves (fully, not just in devolved matters).

I agree with the statement that the people of Scotland have a "fundamental, political right to determine their own constitutional future." To me, this means a referendum on Independence.
From the statements that have been made by politicians of all parties, both before and after the SNP became the government of Scotland, I feel that Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives are intent on denying the people of Scotland this most basic right. If they truely believe that the people of Scotland would vote against independence, why are they so opposed to a referrendum? Surely this would only serve to prove their point and put an end to such discussion? I suggest that a referrendum is the only way to find out the true will of the Scottish people.

All the main political parties claim to want what is best for Scotland and her residents. I belive this would be best served by letting them have their say on how they are ruled and on who they are (Scottish, British, European etc).

I am glad that this national conversation has been launched to allow Scots to share their opinions openly.

This issue has been long disputed and it is time for the ordinary people of Scotland to have their say instead of sitting silent while politicians fight it out for their own personal gain.

Frank Park item 28 "At least an Edinburgh based Government will have the interests of the Scottish Nation as its primary concern"
I do not think so (personal opinion) Frank. Edinburgh based will be Edinburgh focussed and within that focus whichever elite is in control. Why not Glasgow based. Why not a Highland?lowland split. Why not federalism within Scotland. Look at the traffic mess in Edinburgh. Look at the effect of the honeypot theory in places like Galashiels, everything jammed in, based on "economics". Every level is concerned with gathering to and controlling resources to their own ultimate glorification. Scotland has the inalienable right to be an independent nation but as your comment might, I say might suggest, it all boils down to parochial interest and the handful of people in charge, witness President Blair and now Brown. What people seem to forget is that leaders who govern in our name, for us, soon forget that is why they are there and instead decide what they think is best complete with the inherent bias and prejudice we all have. So go for independance but with a federal structure based on regionalism, then at least those who mess up our lives will be closer to hand when we want to influence them or not to re-elect them