Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Drink Driving, Don't Risk It!

SNP urges political rivals to back key Calman proposals

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 26 June 2009
By DAVID MADDOX
SCOTTISH POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
THE SNP has thrown down the gauntlet to the unionist parties to back key proposals from the Calman Commission to give Holyrood more powers.
It came as splits began to open up among the three parties backing the Calman Commission process, amid accusations that the Conservatives want to push the report "into the long grass".

SNP ministers yesterday started the formal process which could
lead to the swift hand-over of powers over drink-driving, speed limits and airguns to the Scottish Parliament by putting down orders in Holyrood and challenging UK ministers to do the same. The SNP's constitution minister, Mike Russell, said there was no point in waiting to push through reforms that all the parties agreed on.

The one area of disagreement is over taxation, where the SNP believe that proposals to give Holyrood control over almost half of income tax raised in Scotland is meaningless.

The SNP has pointed out that the commission's chairman, Sir Kenneth Calman, agreed with their approach. In an interview on 15 June he said: "I think there are lots of bits, as I mentioned, which I think can be implemented quickly and easily without too much fuss."

However, the SNP's gambit was damned as being a "political stunt" by the other three main parties, who believe the whole report needs to be considered as a single package. Tory leader Annabel Goldie said: "The SNP is dancing to the unionist jig."

But Ms Goldie was also having to defend her party's approach to the Calman proposals after she said the process "should not be rushed".

Ms Goldie has had to acknowledge concerns from a rebel group of more than a third of her party's MSPs, who are sceptical about devolving more powers to Scotland.

David Cameron has been silent on the commission's report since its publication.

A spokesman for Ms Goldie said: "We have a duty to carefully consider the report, especially as it is likely that it will be a Conservative government in Westminster which has to deliver the changes."

However, there was anger from inside the commission. One member said: "The Conservatives should be careful what they do, because if they put this report into the long grass and just shelve it, they will become the anti-devolution party again."

BUDGET ROW

THE Scottish Government was criticised yesterday for failing to build up a fighting fund for the recession, after it emerged it had underspent its budget by only £31 million last year.

The total underspend for 2008-9 was a record low and was hailed as a victory by finance secretary John Swinney, who said that it proved that the Scottish Government was using its resources efficiently and not allowing money to go to waste by being sent back to the Treasury.

Several years ago the Labour-led executive was criticised for underspending its budget by £600m, including £400m for health services. But a Conservative spokesman said: "At these times of recession, when we need care with public spending, spending all the budget and not making savings is not necessarily something to be proud of."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 26 June 2009 1:42 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish National Party
 
1

,

25/06/2009 22:59:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 00:26:20
It came as splits began to open up among the three parties backing the Calman Commission process amid accusations that the Conservatives want to push the report "into the long grass".
----------

Cracks beginning to show in the Tory/BLP alliance? I suspect they will kiss and make up before long.

3

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 26/06/2009 00:58:53
So Tavish Scott is not a unionist, well what is he ,who is he, Does he know where he is going ??? NO HE IS A LIB/DEM now I've got it.... Roll on the Referendum on Independence and be done with the union with england!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4

Liber Respublica de Scotia,

Scotland, Not Britain. 26/06/2009 01:24:11
The absurdity of the status quo is lucidly palpable when a government that supposedly enjoys devolved powers over domestic law enforcement and the drafting of legislation still can't enact amendments pertaining to firearms and drink-driving.

Never mind superficial, piecemeal devolution. Full, unequivocal, plenary independence can't arrive soon enough.

SAOR ALBA!
5

Liber Respublica de Scotia,

26/06/2009 01:33:44
Oh, Flower of Scotland,
we're going to see your like again,
come referendum,
some time in twenty-o-ten,
and stand united,
before our captors,
and send them homeward,
tae think again!
6

Neil Waugh,

Old Strathcona 26/06/2009 02:47:03
Give us an inch and we'll take a mile.
All part of the natural and inevitable progress towards independence.
Didn't the old Bolsheviks call these people "useful idiots."
7

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 26/06/2009 03:45:11
One suspects that totalitarian politics may be your metier.
8

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 26/06/2009 03:47:16
It's a big step for Tavish and maybe a small step for politics.
9

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 26/06/2009 04:18:59
The cracks are starting to appear amongst the Axis parties.

The Tories don't want devolution at all, so have to play for time till Cameron gets in.

Labour lives under the illusion that Calman is their Marshall Wade to appease the unhappy voters of middle England.

And the LibDems who in absence of a strategy to deliver their Raison Detre of Full Fiscal Federalism have now decided that Future Fiscal Fiasco is good enough.

This unholy alliance certainly cheats voters out of having much choice.

I see people like Tin Man who would like to see Holyrood closed, have no one to vote for because the Tories won't openly support what is their natural position.

And others like, FibDem for Life, will never see their desired Fiscal Federalism because Tavish Scott and Jeremy Purvis don't have the courage of their convictions. The only way that Fiscal Autonomy is ever going to happen is by supporting the SNP and having the Fiscal Autonomy that comes with Independence.

10

dunedin bully wee 1877,

26/06/2009 06:08:37
“Several years ago the Labour-led executive was criticised for underspending its budget by £600m, including £400m for health services. But a Conservative spokesman said: "At these times of recession, when we need care with public spending, spending all the budget and not making savings is not necessarily something to be proud of."

So, is this now the official Tory policy, “whatever cuts Westminster impose upon the Scottish budget, we will cut it by more by under spending and sending £100’s of millions to London to use as they will?

How exactly do they believe that the Scottish taxpayer or economy would benefit from this?
11

BIG EYE,

Paisley 26/06/2009 06:16:00
the worst thing that can happen when a con is in progress is when the victim comes up with an alternative strategy that exposes your vulnerability and cupability.

That is what has already happened with Calman.there was not a lot of substance to start with, the SNP instead of being negative have welcomed these crumbs and are speeding towards implementation leaving the poor unionists dragging their heels trying to stop the process.

Hilarious!
12

Earman,

Paphos 26/06/2009 06:41:31
Big Eye @ 11

As clean a hit on the head of the nail as I've read for some time. Mr Salmond has quite simply played a blinder, and I'm sure that he has had this strategy in place since Calman started "deliberating".

No wonder he (Mr Salmond) remains head and shoulders above his counterparts in the Unionist rump. It is becoming almost, (only ALMOST, mind you), embarrassing to behold his alleged "opponents" - especially Mr Gray - as they flop about, spineless in their conviction and totally unable to match Mr Salmond on any level.

Well done, the Scottish Government. Independence looms large!
13

Mikey,

26/06/2009 06:47:48
#11, you've hit the nail on the head there!

National Party - OK, let's go with the proposals!

Unionistas - Wait a minute boys! If we go now, what'll we have left to con the people with at the next election? Onywey, we didnae really mean it!
14

nabodican,

Newton Stewart 26/06/2009 07:23:01
There is no real power with transfer of powers, the problem lies with what the tartan taliban will do with them.
15

Phil C,

26/06/2009 07:35:51
I think we might just be able to progress without the Tories! I'm certain the ugly LibLab sisters will happily faff around some more though! Cameron's got a year to wait, given Brown's stubborn and undemocratic Clingon tendencies.

Just get on with whatever. There are more important things going on like preparing for independence. Unionists are the masters of cliche and meaningless talk. Waste matter which should be on the compost heap. Hot air that should be recycled.
16

Phil C,

26/06/2009 07:36:39
Btw rip Michael. Cue the gushing media hypocrites!
17

,

26/06/2009 08:26:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 08:29:40
Slowly,slowly ,catch the monkey!!!

Well played yet again Alex.,

Every power devolved is a step closer to Scotland rejoining the nations of the world.

Let us hope the Tories resort to type and show the Scottish people before the General Election that leopards never change their spots.
It will only make the SNP vote larger .
19

Linda,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 08:40:49
From The New Statesman....
Word reaches me from a senior cabinet ally of the Prime Minister that the recent proposal by Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, for a referendum on PR to be held on the day of the next general election is being considered at the highest levels. Like Roy Hattersley, a recent convert to PR and a Labour weathervane, Brown is said to be increasingly aware of PR’s merits. He is also in favour of a written constitution.

First-past-the-post provides a system in which general elections are determined by roughly a million people in marginal seats. From the power of these Middle England voters flows an entire media and political culture that is skewed to the right of Labour, while the progressive majority is disenfranchised. This helps to explain the disproportionate influence of Rupert Murdoch and the Daily Mail on government. Like an abused wife, new Labour has self-destructively sought the approval of its own enemy. However, Brown may yet implement a proposal that was, after all, a Labour manifesto commitment in 1997. He knows that to do so before the next election would be portrayed by the Tories and across the media as “changing the rules of the game”. But to do so on election day itself would, at best (if the party pulled off a surprise electoral victory), liberate a future Labour government and, at worst, lessen the likelihood of a two-term Tory government.

Meanwhile, a separate idea, bold if controversial, is quietly being considered for the same election day: a referendum in Scotland on independence. This reflects a rueful and secretly held sense among some in New Labour that devolution was a mistake which emboldened nationalists and strengthened the hand of Alex Salmond, the Scottish National Party’s leader and Scotland’s First Minister. Brown has long fretted about British identity and about how people increasingly define themselves as English, Welsh and Scottish, rather than as British.

20

drunken proffet,

Tassy 26/06/2009 08:42:49
Look on the bright side of life, your average SNP politician is pretty devious and enjoys a better understanding of the world today than those Labour politicians who are still working on the glory of the English labour party. About twenty five years from now you will eventually find a common denominator for all of the British Isles and it may not be what you expect. I would say that if you get rid of the scruffy vote you could do it in maybe five years.
21

dunedin bully wee 1877,

26/06/2009 08:59:13
20 Linda

Two referenda on the same day as a general election?

They really are losing the plot!
22

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 09:05:10
The position of the parties has been evident for years now.
1) SNP. Committed to independence and anything which would facilitate the right of the Scottish electorate to choose their own destiny including independence.
2) As little as humanly possible whilst the oil revenues are taken by London ,Scotland is short changed under the pretence that she is subsidised when analysis over many years has shown unequivocally that its the other way round)and what Scotland was given the elected representatives of Scotland did not even spend, so it was returned in part to LONDON. We should take independence then try every single one of them on a charge of treason.
We have to presume that every single Labour Tory and Lib Dem MP and MSP knew about the lies and deception that HAVE DEFINITELY BEEN PERPETRATED UPON US and anybody who says otherwise is either a liar or an idiot.Some like Ian Gray are even proud of being a liar and consider this to be what politics is about!The art of deception is a dubious skill to start with,and when one deceives ones own its bordering on insanity.

We are bought and sold for English gold sic a parcel o rogues in a nation.

Stupid? We are not even that bright, but we are certainly that crazy.
At least I can understand the Tory position of retain the UK and we can have Tory government imposed upon us against the wishes of the Scottish people because a majority of much larger England wishes this to be so,and the Labour Party are so thick they not only allow this, they facilitate it!
They can claim to represent the poor (which they do not)in opposition and walk around like a bunch of total bird brains saying " Aye but they didnae get in north of the border" With people as stupid as that who needs the village idiots?
23

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 09:06:33
21 What is a proffet?
24

john z,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 09:22:36
Oh, Annabel, Tavish and Iain, this isn't how it was meant to be, was it??

Calman was supposed to stuff the SNP, wasn't it?? It didn't work.

But look, you must wake up. The world changes, and the aspirations of Scotland have changed. Time to move on with Scotland, rather than fighting Scotland.

There is no contentment with this tired, undemocratic, english union.


Get with the programme, for heavens sake, before you become entirely irrelevant to Scotland forever.


25

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 09:24:34
20 Labour may well suddenly see a case for a form of PR but its because they are a dead party unless they force it through before the GE .
They will spend the next 20 years at least in oblivion plus it stops the SNP presumably going anywhere until they have such a level of support they cannot be stopped.

Again they act not for the benefit of you or me or even cousins in England but for the people who really matter ONLY (The Labour Party members).

When the stupid people in Scotland recognise that Labour are a self preservation society and precious little else,then maybe we might start to go somewhere.
IT is bad enough to witness that your fellow countryman is brainwashed but its an incredibly stupid one who presumes that it cannot be happening because he is unaware of it.
26

Yeah1,

26/06/2009 09:37:12
#26

"Labour may well suddenly see a case for a form of PR but its because they are a dead party unless they force it through before the GE .
They will spend the next 20 years at least in oblivion plus it stops the SNP presumably going anywhere"

PR would benefit the SNP not stop them.

At the last general election the SNP got almost 18% of the vote but only 10% of the seats - under PR they would obviously have got 18% of the seats.
27

Rasco,

26/06/2009 09:46:06
Calman says bits could be implemented quickly but hearing Spud Murph on TV last night saying it was a package there is no chance of that happening,Murph also said it could all be implemented by the next election no chance then the Tories will ditch the whole thing when they will win the next election.Off topic did I hear right that Hamish of this paper is leaving anyone know where he is going maybe going to work full time for Lab????
28

dunedin bully wee 1877,

26/06/2009 10:03:22
29 Joe,

Who exactly are these “Tartan Talban” and which “east-coast” are you referring to if it is not already included in Scotland?
29

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 10:16:08
27 What PR achieves depends upon what level of support you command, because whilst proportional in itself, it replaces a system which is not. It benefits therefore those who have lower levels of support at the expense of those who previously benefited from FTTP. Of course if you assume that the level of support for the SNP is as was the last time clearly the SNP would benefit in terms of representation .Its not that long ago that the SNP were second in 41 seats and were not all that far away from being the largest party in terms of level of support but of course the seats they were first in was around the 7 mark if I recall correctly.

The SNP would probably return at least 35% of the vote next time around but clearly would need 0 50% to claim the right to independence.That I accept,but they would hold nearly every seat in Scotland with that 35 plus level of support under FPTP and it was enough to elect any colour of government in LONDON for years and has been employed at Holyrood ,but not at Westminster.
Expediency is what we are witnessing here,and whilst what you say might be true on this occasion it was ignored for long enough.Its only when Labour are being replaced by the Tories and the SNP that we have this sudden conversion to PR and it could not be more obvious than it is!
From a Scottish point of view its introduction has more of an obstacle quality than a facility quality about it.
You only have to look at Holyrood to see how it works.Only when the SNP achive a majority will they have independence (rightly so) but we will try and retain power as long as possible at Westmidden and delay that possibility by prevention of a FTTP SNP victory which is now a real possibility.


The effect of the SNP winning nearly every seat under FTTP would be terminal and you know it!
Of course the various systems of PR will produce a more representative result(although not identical necessarily),and that is as it should be,but please do not try to suggest that they
30

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 10:17:54
31 cont


The effect of the SNP winning nearly every seat under FTTP would be terminal and you know it!
Of course the various systems of PR will produce a more representative result(although not identical necessarily),and that is as it should be,but please do not try to suggest that they act in favour of anybody but themselves.

What you are saying is arithmetically sound enough, but why you are saying it is far more important.

Scotland should or should not be an independent nation depending upon the majority expressed view,and I acknowledge that this should be so.I support democratic accountability.
Whether she is afforded that right to choose is debatable. There is world of difference between recognising the democratic wishes of the people and avoiding them for as long as possible.Retention of FTTP by the Unionists,is no longer an option in Scotland because it would probably produce an SNP walk over sooner rather than later, and the case for independence via a referendum would be almost impossible to stop when that happens. It might not be a majority in favour of independence,but it would be a sufficient level to demand we measure this in a referendum. That is something WESTMIDDEN will never support unless they know its not going to materialise or its all over anyway.

Scots are asking themselves two questions .
1) WHAT is the best way to provide good governance which benefits ALL of the people of Scotland ?
2) What is the best way to preserve the Union (which certainly does NOT benefit all of the people of Scotland, but clearly benefits some )!
31

langtonian,

uphall 26/06/2009 10:20:24
Calman commission.

>SNP at it again, as "political cherry pickers" they are streets ahead of all others when it comes to selecting the "bits" that suit their own manifesto while treating the leavings as unsuitable to their taste.

Calman,is an entire document, a way forward for Holyrood they should get on with it ASAP.(In Total)

NO Referendum is requiered, the next full blown election is where the vast majority of Scot's voters will express their view's and mark THEIR ballot paper.
32

Fitba Krazy,

26/06/2009 10:24:25
19 Scottish and Proud

"Let us hope the Tories resort to type and show the Scottish people before the General Election that leopards never change their spots.
It will only make the SNP vote larger."

By suggesting the SNP Scottish Government should be SAVING ffs during a recession is them reverting to type.

During a recession we should be using all the money that should have been saved by the UK Government during the boom times to cushion the effects of the recession, but those unionist parties made a total mess of it and CAUSED the bwiddy recession by not having a flipping clue.

What use is money if you don't spend it?

Do the greedy fkn idiots get off at looking at it?

Spend the money NOW and build a scenario that helps for the future and propagate wealth for all.

But that's the opposite of what they really want apparently, judging by the stupid assertion by Cameron to save during a recession.

Wtf are you saving for there? A bigger recession so that you can save even more?

Clown.
33

Queen D,

26/06/2009 10:24:32
Yep Morris , it certainly benefits a group of Labour MPs!
Though I think the group is shrinking!
34

Publius,

London 26/06/2009 10:33:29
10.35 already - and only 35 posts. You nationalist fanatics must be running out of steam.
Question for you. Next year the Tories will almost certainly win the UK general election - and get an increased vote in Scotland perhaps winning four or five seats. What will you do then?
35

Publius,

London 26/06/2009 10:35:37
#20 Linda

If you believe the New Statesman, you'll believe anything. Pravda perhaps? Or Mein Kampf? Or the SNP on local income tax?
36

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 10:42:21
33 Calman is a complete document?

Is there any other kind?

No referendum is required. Says who?

the next full blown election is where the vast majority of Scot's voters will express their view's and mark THEIR ballot paper.

Yes as is every election and what if it produces a result which says we need a referendum?
37

Nicky Tam,

THE FREE NATION OF SCOTLAND 26/06/2009 10:43:04
On STV last night Lurch Murphy just could not contain his bile as he spoke of the SNP and their consultation, "I think it's called the national conversation or something like that ," he knows well what it is called, at least they consider all options.

Calman was undemocratic and bigoted by being afraid to debate the independence option. Calman is simply a desperate rear guard action by the unionist cabal to slow down the inevitable rise in support for independence. The Unionists do not have the courage to ask the question.

Now we see the unionist cabal caught fast on the horns of their own dilema by proposing powers that they laughed at when the SNP asked for them. Hypocrtical or what?

They try to spin and say that the SNP are wasting time and money by having a referendum when they are concentrating on fixing the recession.

Also, it has already been noted that Unionists and the media were constantly preaching at us that different tax rates was not possible, when it was being proposed for LIT.

We were also being told that Scottish taxpayers could not be easily identified, that too was when it was proposed for LIT.

So, where have these arguments gone?

Are they sitting alongside the Glenrothes register on the same shelves that Jim Devine claimed for?

All ready the splits are showing as Salmond's acceptance of Calman has the unionist cabal thinking WTF.

http://tinyurl.com/mcl6va
38

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 10:45:00
38 Faced with the choice of the New Statesman and Pub lius I favour the NS.

I presume you are a Scot who resides in London yes?
39

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 10:53:02
40 At least we can console ourselves in the knowledge that anyone who takes Lurch seriously ,are themselves not taken seriously.
What he thinks he achieves God only Knows.
40

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 26/06/2009 10:53:09
# 33 langtonian

"NO Referendum is requiered, the next full blown election is where the vast majority of Scot's voters will express their view's and mark THEIR ballot paper."

Since the Tax Powers currently afforded the Scottish Parliament required a referendum, why doesn't changing them require one?

If you argument is that winning an election and being able to pass legislation through Parliament is all that is required to enact Constitutional Change, would it also be acceptable if the SNP was able to pass legislation at Holyrood that unilaterally declared Scotland's Independence?

There is no such thing as a "package" in legislation before Parliament, bills are amended with new bits added and others dropped all the time.

The whole Calman debate is just a smoke screen and I very much doubt it will reach a vote before the next general election. After that it will be quietly dropped.


41

Nicky Tam,

THE FREE NATION OF SCOTLAND 26/06/2009 10:55:59
#40


Brian Taylor agrees:



Weeping buckets

Mr Salmond knows all that - and so Mr Salmond is out to be Mr Reasonable when it comes to his referendum.

You don't like asking about independence? Well, then, put in the option of your Calman Commission proposals.

As I have written before, he won't exactly weep buckets if his Referendum Bill is blocked.

He would use it as a tactical issue at the next Holyrood election.

There's another, more immediate tactical problem for Mr Salmond's opponents.

They say that they aren't entirely against the concept of a referendum. It's largely about timing.

Not now. Economy in crisis. Too disruptive. Wait. Defer.

In which case, why pursue the Calman agenda so enthusiastically and urgently? That involves, does it not, substantial change including fiscal transfer.
42

Nicky Tam,

THE FREE NATION OF SCOTLAND 26/06/2009 10:57:36
re#44

http://tinyurl.com/lhsy5u
43

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 26/06/2009 11:01:26
Publius

"Question for you. Next year the Tories will almost certainly win the UK general election - and get an increased vote in Scotland perhaps winning four or five seats. What will you do then?"

I think the big question is what will the Tories do?

Will they make their massive proposed cuts to public spending?

Will they cut Scotland's Block Grant and allow the SNP to brand Cameron as "Son Of Thatcher".

Meanwhile the amount of Oil Revenue flowing from Scotland to Westminster will be all time highs.

If he follows through on his cuts its SNP Majority at the next Scottish Election.
44

redcliffe62,

26/06/2009 11:10:55
alasdair, i lived in relugas. albeit relugas place for many years and can confirm it is nowhere near livingston.
that train line was loud i can tell you.
now back to topic.
tories sit on the committee, claim to be the voice of the majority when calman ignores the elephant in the corner, and then say "change should not be rushed".
cameron rather keen on change at wastemonster at the momment, so change is a good thing when it is for the better and it has approval of all parties.
or have the tories reverted back to type in a 1979 devolution persona, one they apparently still hold despite attampts to pretend that they support any level of scottish collective input.
a realistic heading for this story could be "tories against calman changes for now", and i would add the footnote,...... and forever more or until hell freezes over!
45

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 11:11:42
So let's get this right, political grandstanding apart, there is an opportunity to take swift action and devolve further powers agreed by all Parties and Westminster (who set the Calman commission up), but it's not going to happen because the Unionists who ''invented'' the Calman commission (after all nobody voted for it, it wasn't in any of their manifestos), are now getting cold feet.

This is farcical.

Regards the New Statemsn it's just as credible as the Spectator. Both journals have political axes to grind, but both journals can equally well be a source of useful information. The ability to think for yourself when reading them is recommended.
46

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 11:16:53
The Scottish Tories will be screwed when Cameron gets in. They have come over all nicey nice since devolution, and perhaps they even are, but Cameron is not, and he will scythe through Scotland like the Grim Reaper.

The only future I think the Scottish Tories have got if is they cut the link with the UK Party and operate on their own.
47

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 11:29:42
36 The Tories will win 4 or 5 seats in Scotland.

1) I doubt this since you cannot project Scottish results based upon England forecasts or trends.The Tores will continue to be also rans in Scotland.

2_ Even if the Tories did win a handful of seats in Scotland it makes sod all difference.

What matters in Scotland is which party is the largest.
The SNP or The Labour Party (and a handful of other Unionists who may yet form an even more unholy alliance than witnessed so far).
What the SNP will do is what we have always done. What the Scottish people will probably do is what they have never done before in terms of a majority held view, and recognise we have a democratic deficit,governed by a Tory government which has no mandate to govern in Scotland.
A referendum will then mysteriously become flavour of the month with the few members that still survive in the Labour and not quite so Unionist Party (Scotland Branch).
The Labour Party never cared what happened to Scotland, only that the pigs at the Westmidden trough should be LABOUR pigs. When they discover they are no longer wanted as grunters they will grunt off to Holyrood and try and get their noses back into the pigswill. The people of Scotland decide what happens to her.NOBODY ELSE.

What the SNP will do (as a government elect should) is consult with, and listen to the people. We are a democratic party.We also recognise the futility of even thinking about a non sustainable action.
The people are who we serve.Not the other way round.

Maybe you should try it at Westmidden You might even like democracy !
48

Yeah1,

26/06/2009 11:44:12
#50

"What the SNP will do (as a government elect should) is consult with, and listen to the people. We are a democratic party.We also recognise the futility of even thinking about a non sustainable action.
The people are who we serve.Not the other way round."

Was Angus Robertson 'serving the people' when he claimed for a £2,300 sofa bed at their expense?
49

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 11:46:22
51 Whats that got to do with anything? Were the Westmidden MPS serving the people when they repaid half a million and that was the ones who had not been unmasked!
50

Yeah1,

26/06/2009 11:53:51
#52

"Whats that got to do with anything?"

You are spouting guff about the SNP somehow being a pure, untainted party whose only desire is to 'serve the people', when they are just as bad as every other political party - in it for what they can get.
51

drunken proffet,

Tassy 26/06/2009 11:55:51
#24 I am sorry but I have no idea. However a Drunken Proffet contemplates life from a horizontal, rather than a vertical position. Very similar to lying on the front lawn and looking at the stars. Mind expanding and a good idea if you have had a few jars.
52

dunedin bully wee 1877,

26/06/2009 11:57:22
51 Yeah1

I’m sure that Angus Robertson can produce the sofa bed if required.

Can the same be said for the “Devine” shelves or any evidence of the existence of the mysterious sparky?
53

Rob7,

Shetland 26/06/2009 12:00:48
Ho about Shetland and Orkney getting independence from Scotland?
54

ukrefusenik,

falkirk camelonshire 26/06/2009 12:01:42
yeah 1 says " i am desperate " the stench of corrupt labourism distracts from his attempt to smear , is it just me , or does the whacko jacko thing turn anybody elses stomach ? call jarvis cocker . if the entire jackson five were to have caught fire live onstage in las vegas , i wouldnt have given it more than a passing glance . last year he was a stot the ba' , now suddenly.......sick bliddy british media
55

ukrefusenik,

rockall 26/06/2009 12:04:15
rockall wants nothing to do with this splitter Rob 7
56

Yeah1,

26/06/2009 12:06:53
#55

"I’m sure that Angus Robertson can produce the sofa bed if required."

I'm not suggesting that the sofa bed doesn't exist - I am suggesting charging the people £2,300 for a sofa bed is an obscene amount of money from a party that supposedly only exists to 'serve the people' as Morris suggests.

Surely Robertson would have served the people better by finding a cheaper sofa bed than the luxurious one he charged us for?
57

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 26/06/2009 12:20:25
59 Well email Angus and ask him, as for his constituents I am sure that he will have had to answer questions about his expenses.

If you want to go down the road of sleaze the path to the Tory and Labour party is the way to go.

So we have the unionist cabal that supported and provisioned Calman are now saying we cannae implement this and that.

As was expected all fur coat and nae nickers, I watch a very impressive Mike Russell offer to implement the parts agreed PDQ.

Labour oh we better wait....

The precedent was set in 1997 for a referendum and a further referendum will be required to alter that agreed by us the people.

Democracy for dummies for the inbred and unionist cabal.
58

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 12:31:10
51
Yeah1

"Was Angus Robertson 'serving the people' when he claimed for a £2,300 sofa bed at their expense?"

Left to the likes of you, political debate would be reduced to an endless exchange of petty jibes about expenses claims. Get over it, fool! There are other things happening in the world.

59

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 12:31:38
36 Publius*

Not even crossed your mind that 4 or 5 MPs in not a mandate to rule Scotland from Westminster! Over 5 million people's interests looked after by 4 non-entities...the Union's democracy??

Expect this theme to expand!
60

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 12:37:16
61 Hermit*

Agreed, i do think it is excessive for a sofa bed but this is thoughtless rather than corrupt.

However it's peanuts compared to Brown and Darling's home swapping, Devine's missing receipts, Connarty 'conning' the system and on and on and on.

Difference is that some have over claimed at the tax payers expense which was stupid and indulgent while other have 'played' the system for maximum benefit and in some cases committing fraud!

The latter extends to the PM!
61

Number 6,

Germany 26/06/2009 12:38:21
I just hope the SNP don't get bored with continously running rings round the unionista cabals.

Keep it up, the flocks are close to jacking it in. Certainly their shepherds are.

62

Publius,

London 26/06/2009 12:40:05
#41 Morris

Sorry not to have replied earlier. Too much work to do.

The New Statesman is a polemical journal of the left. Its columnists are now desperate because Labour is going down the plughole. They are clutching at every straw. There's virtually no chance of Wesminster passing a bill to hold referendums on this, that and the other on the same day as the next general election. Even if the Commons voted yes, the Lords would vote no.

Yes I'm a Scot in London. But I work in London rather than 'reside' here. I go back home nearly every weekend.
63

Yeah1,

26/06/2009 12:41:54
#62

"Not even crossed your mind that 4 or 5 MPs in not a mandate to rule Scotland from Westminster! Over 5 million people's interests looked after by 4 non-entities"

You may not like it but the general election is an election for the whole of the UK, not just Scotland.

The tories will likely only get a small number of MPs in Northern England too - why don't you complain about the interests of a much larger population in Northern England only being served by a few MPs too?
64

Yeah1,

26/06/2009 12:44:02
#61

"Left to the likes of you, political debate would be reduced to an endless exchange of petty jibes about expenses claims."

Sorry but when people like Morris try to suggest that the SNP are somehow a saintly, pure party whose only interest is to 'serve the people' that obviously has to be refuted.
65

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 12:44:36
36
Publius

"Question for you. Next year the Tories will almost certainly win the UK general election - and get an increased vote in Scotland perhaps winning four or five seats."

You unionist fanatics certainly have a talent for shooting yourself in the foot. Frequently when said foot is still in your silly mouth.

What you describe is precisely the scenario that will persuade the majority of Scotland's voters that secession is the only option.

"What will you do then?"

Fill Holyrood with nationalists.

66

Publius,

London 26/06/2009 12:45:05
#62 Nevsky

Issue isn't about mandates. It's about the wisdom of challenging a new government in its honeymoon period.
67

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 12:50:55
67
Yeah1

"Sorry but when people like Morris try to suggest that the SNP are somehow a saintly, pure party whose only interest is to 'serve the people' that obviously has to be refuted."

I suspect you have already forgotten that these were your words, not his.

And, desperately as you need to pretend otherwise, the claim you refer to was perfectly legitimate anyway. Rather than scoring some piffling point, all you have done is draw attention yet again to the fact that, compared to the Tory/BLP alliance, the SNP is RELATIVELY clean.

Here in the real world, that is the best that mature people expect.

68

Publius,

London 26/06/2009 12:52:45
#68 Electric Hermit

Don't bet on it. And you'll find a lot of Scots who have been Labour or SNP during the past few years will hedge their own bets if the Tories win.
69

John S,

26/06/2009 12:53:30
Ref 'serve the people', - Gordon Brown, Labour has ..... and we will never forget the people who we entered politics to serve.14 May 2009
Does this mean that the BLP is in politics to 'serve the people' ?

The following (13) Scottish Labour Party Constituency who have entered politics and have served themselves helpings of the food allowance during the UK Parliament recess.......no it is silly to go down that road.
70

Yeah1,

26/06/2009 12:54:04
#70

"And, desperately as you need to pretend otherwise, the claim you refer to was perfectly legitimate anyway."

Actually whilst it was legally legitimate it could be said to go against the green book expense rules.

The rules state that any item of furnishing purchased on expenses must not be 'luxurious' or 'extravagant'.

I think most people would agree that £2,300 for a sofa bed is very extravagant.
71

Iain Mac,

26/06/2009 12:58:39
Go for it. Every wee bit of power we get back counts.
72

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 13:02:27
69 Publius*

It will be all about the mandate!!

The Tories will almost certainly get and increased vote in Scotland; so what?

The Tories will have NO mandate whatsoever to govern Scotland from Westminster...not only that, with 4 MPs (whoop de doo) Scotland's interests will never be served from the Tories front benches.

Not like they are counting on Scotland to vote them in and swing the Westminster balance now is it!
73

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:07:22
72
Publius

"And you'll find a lot of Scots who have been Labour or SNP during the past few years will hedge their own bets if the Tories win."

The dream of a Tory revival in Scotland is no more than that. Pure fantasy.

74

mr broon,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 13:15:07
In many ways, the Nationalists have out-manouvered the Scots Unionist parties with regard to Calman which
will inevitably be kicked into the long grass.

Mind you, a bunch of 5 year olds could fool this bunch of out-dated, third rate politicians who couldn't gerrymander their way out of a paper bag!
75

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:16:18
74
Yeah1

"I think most people would agree that £2,300 for a sofa bed is very extravagant."

Most people would want to know the facts first.

76

John S,

26/06/2009 13:17:24
#75 Iain Mac, I agree. Every wee bit of power we get back counts.
I think the handing control of drink-driving alcohol levels, speed limits, airguns to Holyrood isn't such a "big deal" but it does help to create more differences between Scotland and other parts of the UK which the Unionist parties are having second thoughts about, once given is difficult to take back.
77

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 13:18:39
76

"The Tories will have NO mandate whatsoever to govern Scotland from Westminster..."

What on earth are you talking about?

The forthcoming general election is not to 'govern Scotland' but to govern the UK.

This ludicrous griping from the nats only highlights their ignorance of teh constitutional make-up of the UK.....
78

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 13:20:44
79
"Most people would want to know the facts first."

Are you kidding?

Most people would say, 'two and a half grand for a futon, are you having a laugh?'
79

JoeMiddleton,

Edinburgh, Scotland 26/06/2009 13:22:30
The choice is between the limited powers of devolution which can be amended at will by Labour or Tories or the normal full powers of independence that we can claim for ourselves.

The Tories probably are planning to kick Calman into the long grass. Historically we know how much we can trust their promises on devolution!

If the British Government does re-open the Scotland act it will only be to fiddle it to further their interests not Scotland's.
80

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:24:06
82
Grahamski

Obviously, when I referred to people who want to know the facts I was not talking about mindless knee-jerkers such as yourself.

81

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 13:25:56
The cracks are already beginning to show. The Tories are 100% Unionists and they would barely exist had it not been for keeping a low profile on constitutional matters within the Scottish parliament.

Now however, when a constitutional question arises they are in the doo doo again.

Agree to what the majority of Scots want and they can see gradualist Independence and the inevitable consequewnces!

Stand against any more devolved powers and they will have to defend being Unionists at the expense of Scotland and against the will of the Scottish people.

It's win win for the SNP and just what has always been predicted would happen!



82

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:28:07
81
Grahamski

"This ludicrous griping from the nats only highlights their ignorance of teh constitutional make-up of the UK....."

This ludicrous griping only highlights how your rigid unionist ideology renders you incapable of recognising Scotland as a nation.

There is no reason why your disability should prevent the rest of us from moving forward.

83

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 13:32:46
81 Graham*

You would say that being a unionist buffoon.

Any reasonable person would question whether or not Scotland's interests can really be served by 4 Tory MPs at Westmister.

I don't think so.

84

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:32:55
85
Nevsky

"It's win win for the SNP and just what has always been predicted would happen!"

Precisely. This is why I could never understand the faction within the SNP which opposed the party campaigning for a devolution "Yes" vote. It was always perfectly obvious to me that, rather than blocking the secession movement as was intended, devolution would add impetus to that movement such as to make independence inevitable.

85

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 13:39:30
88 Hermit*

Agree totally. Scottish politics has changed and the unionists are being forced to address the question 'what is in the best interests of Scotland'. It's just not good enough stating that you are a 'unionist' no matter what.

Yet to see in over year posting here ANY strong unionist argument for staying within the union..that is how weak their case is.

It's pathetic and a ludicrous stance...Scotland has moved on...they haven't!
86

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 13:42:21
Hermit*

Keep dangling the carrot of real powers in front of the Labour party in Scotand and the Lib Dems and they will take it at some stage.

Scottish Labour influence in the UK is over for a very very long time..so they have the options in front of them.

Same with the Lib Dems...they just don't know where to sit on the fence but are more likely to switch at some stage.

Tavish stating 'i am no unionist' for instance..news to me!
87

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 13:44:42
87
"Any reasonable person would question whether or not Scotland's interests can really be served by 4 Tory MPs at Westmister."

Any reasonable person would understand that the forthcoming general election is for the UK and wouldn't make that kind of ill-informed statement of assuming Scotland votes as a bloc...
88

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:45:00
89
Nevsky

"Yet to see in over year posting here ANY strong unionist argument for staying within the union."

I believe I remarked on that myself recently. The unionist alliance has been reduced to name-calling and the kind of blatant smear tactics that have become the hallmark of this once-great newspaper.

89

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 13:46:46
90

"Tavish stating 'i am no unionist' for instance..news to me!"

Not surprised, like most cybernats you can't imagine an opinion or point of view which isn't your own. It is perfectly possible to be anti-nat without being pro-union.
90

John S,

26/06/2009 13:48:15
Then - A Conservative insider said: "While we are not going to sign up to every spit and comma in the report now, I think it is clear that we would only want to make minor adjustments." 16 June 2009
And Now - But Ms Goldie was also having to defend her party's approach to the Calman proposals after she said the process "should not be rushed".26 June 2009

Then - Senior Labour figures told The Scotsman that they hoped to push through many of the Calman Commission's far-reaching proposals before a general election, as part of revolutionary changes to the devolution settlement.16 June 2009
And Now ......by the other three main parties, who believe the whole report needs to be considered as a single package. 26 June 2009

Then - Both Labour and the Conservatives made it clear that whichever party is in government would implement the major changes proposed in the Calman recommendations.16 June 2009
And now - A spokesman for Ms Goldie said: "We have a duty to carefully consider the report, especially as it is likely that it will be a Conservative government in Westminster which has to deliver the changes." 26 June 2009
91

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:51:09
90
Nevsky

"Keep dangling the carrot of real powers in front of the Labour party in Scotand and the Lib Dems and they will take it at some stage."

Certainly a split in the British Labour Party is far more likely than the Tory revival that some envisage. There has always been strong support for independence among the BLP's Scottish membership. A Scottish Labour Party aligned with the SNP in support of secession is not beyond the realms of possibility.

92

Grahamski,

26/06/2009 13:51:28
84
Electro Helmand rants:
"I was not talking about mindless knee-jerkers such as yourself."
92
Entero hetro fulminates:
"The unionist alliance has been reduced to name-calling"

Are these two poster by any chance related?

Mr pot I'd like you to meet Mr Kettle......
93

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 13:54:16
95
And finally Mr Halman flips: "A Scottish Labour Party aligned with the SNP in support of secession is not beyond the realms of possibility."

Nor is Scotland winning the world cup or Mr Salmond behaving with a modicum of dignity but we both know it's never going to happen, don't we?
94

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:54:58
93
Grahamski

"...you can't imagine an opinion or point of view which isn't your own."

I would freely admit to being incapable of the kind of contorted doublethink necessary to be both a nationalist and a unionist at the same time.

95

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 13:56:49
96
Grahamski

"Electro Helmand" "Entero hetro"

Not all the unionist name-calling is quite so infantile.

96

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 14:01:08
97
Grahamski

Proof, if such were needed, that mindless zealotry is not an aid to rational political analysis.
97

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:05:00
100
No, but it does seem to serve the ranks of cybernats well so perhaps you shouldn't be quite so dismissive....
98

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 14:05:23
95 Hermit*

It's Scottish Labour's only real chance of power; they are finished in Hampstead for a while that is for sure.

I think the UK Labour Pary will split over time due to the simple fact that the politics in both countries is diverging.

English Labour Party will emerge as a very different beast concentrating on middle England...the Scottish version will naturally concentrate on Scotland and still try and tout the 'working class' garbage that is as outdated as Lenin's embalming.

Let's just hope that ALL of those who have Scotland's interests at heart are not afraid to take the leap when they have to...otherwise we will have more years of simplistic buffoons like Grahamski to suffer!

99

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:05:43
99
"Not all the unionist name-calling is quite so infantile."

Nor funny........

100

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:17:13
81 Glory Be ! Grahamski has seen the light. The next GE is a UK one and we will get the Tories whether we vote for them or not. That is the point of Scottish independence Grahamski. We decide who our Government are, not our numerically superior neighbours.
101

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:19:39
91 and then Grahamski retreats into darkness again. Scotland doesn't vote as a 'bloc'. Well yes it does actually the bloc is called Scotland.
102

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:20:26
Grahamski like all unionists finds it impossible to promote any benefits of the union for Scotland .

His only comments are those anti SNP ,and anti Scottish.
He wishes to keep the staus quo at any price which leads me to believe he is one of those parasites that has been sucking the people of Scotland dry.

He wishes to maintain that wh@re of Parliaments in London it can be the only explanation.
103

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:21:23
97 Really ? Someone should tell Mr S Purcell that......
104

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:22:18
104
"The next GE is a UK one and we will get the Tories whether we vote for them or not."

Speaking as a citizen of the UK we will get what government our fellow citizens vote for.

Creating artificial boundaries suit the opportunists of nationalism just now.

I wonder how keen you'll be in drawing imaginary and gerrymandering lines when Glasgow and the Shetlands declare UDI in the unlikely event of the Scottish people deciding on independence?
105

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:23:23
107
I'll mention it to him the next time I see him....
106

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:25:05
105
Observer,
Don't be silly....
107

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:25:46
108 You may speak as a citizen of the UK if you want, but I am a citizen of Scotland.
108

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 14:27:06
102
Nevsky

Precisely the kind of reasoned political analysis that the likes of Grahamski are totally incapable of.

For me, the emergence of a distinctive Scottish Labour Party can't come soon enough. Likewise, a distinctive Scottish Conservative party. That too will be essential to a strong democratic Scotland.

109

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:28:12
111
You're a UK national. You can call yourself whatever you like, thousands of your fellow citizens describe themselves as Jedis so no need to be embarrassed....
110

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:29:12
Oh dear equating a persons sense of national identity with a character from Star Wars ? Tut tut......
111

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:29:21
111 Observer I hate to be pedantic ,however we are SUBJECTS ,only when we have Independence can we be citizens.
112

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 14:30:32
108
Grahamski

"I wonder how keen you'll be in drawing imaginary and gerrymandering lines when Glasgow and the Shetlands declare UDI in the unlikely event of the Scottish people deciding on independence?"

It is possible to imagine anything. I can even imagine you talking sense. But that does not mean it is going to happen.

113

Andrew Morton,

Berkshire 26/06/2009 14:30:49
UK Nationalism is a narrow minded and fixated problem to many people within the home countries.

It has to be stopped forthwith.
114

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 14:33:53
108 We know. You already elected 18 years of Tory government which included Thatcher,excpet you claimed the SNP brought the Labour governement down when you have just admitted that the UK electorate DID NOT WANT THEM , and the SNP were in fact propping up a LAbour governement against the wishes of the people of England.

Funny how the truth has a habit of biting some people on the ears(anagram)
115

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 14:34:03
115
Scottish and Proud

"...I hate to be pedantic ,however we are SUBJECTS..."

The fact that some elite chooses to label us as "subjects" does not mean we have to accept that label. Others may consider me a subject of the British crown. I think of myself as a citizen of Scotland.

116

Jonas Jonaitis,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 14:34:19
Where does independence fit in with the EU, the scottish civic party are pro-eu. Salmond wants to be part of the top table in the EU.

Salmond is nothing more than a power hungry idiot. Why would anybody want him running the country i don't know. He would be worse than the idiots down in westminster.
117

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:34:40
114

"Oh dear equating a persons sense of national identity with a character from Star Wars ? Tut tut......"

Listen, I've read some of your outlandish views about Scottish history and quite frankly Star Wars is more fact-based....arf arf
118

John S,

26/06/2009 14:35:22
#112:Electric Hermit: I cannot help feeling that having a Tory Government in Westminster for the first time since devolution could hasten a distinctive Scottish Labour Party sooner than later.
119

Andrew Morton,

Berkshire 26/06/2009 14:35:30
120

The EU is where the real power lies, not little domestic parliaments such as Westminster or Holyrood.
120

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 14:37:16
120
Jonas Jonaitis

"Where does independence fit in with the EU..."

In precisely the same way as for all the other sovereign nations which are member of the EU.

121

Observer,,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:37:55
121 Oh paying attention are you ? I'm flattered, but gots to go now - enjoy.
122

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 14:38:21
119 Electric Hermit

The fact that some elite chooses to label us as "subjects" does not mean we have to accept that label. Others may consider me a subject of the British crown. I think of myself as a citizen of Scotland.


You are quite right to think of yourself as anything you like .
The fact is we are all subjects in the UK.
when we have Elizabeth Queen of Scots then we can truely be citizens not subjects .
In Scotland the people are sovereign in UK Westminster is sovereign.
123

Grahamski,

Falkirk 26/06/2009 14:39:02
125
Absolutely.
Got to go myself, talk to you later........
124

Andrew Morton,

Berkshire 26/06/2009 14:40:43
125 &127

Very sweet. You guys are good together.
125

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 14:41:43
122
John S

"I cannot help feeling that having a Tory Government in Westminster for the first time since devolution could hasten a distinctive Scottish Labour Party sooner than later."

As I said, it is not beyond the realms of possibility. I would put it no more strongly than that. There are very strong ties binding the "North Britain" branch to the British Labour Party. It would be a mistake to underestimate just how difficult some would find it to break those ties.

126

Jonas Jonaitis,

26/06/2009 14:52:36
124:Electric Hermit

Scottish Independence means the restoration of Scottish sovereignty. Decisions about Scotland made in Scotland by politicians based in Scotland answerable only to voters in Scotland. Being part of the EU that will not happen.

The EU is not democratic, unelected appointees run the EU.
EU law takes precedence over Scots law.
80% of Edinburgh or Westminster legislation is EU regulation.

Talk of Independence from salmond is nothing more than a sound bite.You cant be independent in the EU,the clue to this is in the second word of the EU and that is union.
127

Andrew Morton,

Berkshire 26/06/2009 14:53:48
"The EU is not democratic, unelected appointees run the EU."

Hmm, take it I was just wasting time on June the 4th then?
128

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 14:56:07
56 The Northern Isles are Scottish in terms of legal jusrisdiction and they can only go where Scotland goes. The United Nations recognise nations and a former nation is automatically recognised,as I unerstand this,so Scotland is automatically recognised and includes the Northern Isles who were given as a dowry in the intended marriage of Margaret Maid of Norway.Of course the entire legal proffession could be wrong throughout the EU and UN and you are correct!

The Norwegian government have never questioned that this is so.Are you saying they have?They are the only other country who could claim sovereignty over these islands and have no intention of doing so.
Of course even if you were to somehow become part of a different country to Scotland you realise that we could not provide you with services at the Scottish taxpayers expense like air/sea rescue air ambulances etc health care since that would be a betrayal of the legitimate taxes paid by Scots. Perhaps you think the European Union and United Nations can be ignored ? Interesting theory,but I doubt it even has a status above that of the ususal Labour party scaremongering drivel.
129

Nicky Tam,

THE FREE NATION OF SCOTLAND 26/06/2009 14:58:11
86
Electric Hermit,
26/06/2009 13:28:07


Any one who cannot spell simple words such as.. the, is only a threat to its own sanity and of no relevance on these forums. It's only contribution is juvenile name calling and anti Scottish bigotry, the likes of which you will find in many institutions south of the border.

It is safely ensconced in a darkened room living out a pathetic existence behind a key board with no experience or knowledge of real life which you can see from the guff it leaves behind. It certainly demonstrates an adolescent knowledge of Scotland probably gleaned from pouring over Google and unionist propaganda. It is the perfect unionist drone. Brainless and spineless.

We can see over the months since that glorious day in May 2007, that the blizzard of racist unionist bile posted on these forums has come from a very small number of establishment sponsored trolls, who are probably fed on free Red Bull and Kebabs to keep them at their post 24/7. I'm sure there must be a law to protect these simpletons from this kind of unionist exploitation and oppression.





130

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 14:58:38
130 We can be as independent as other EU nations are including the UK and we can also refuse the terms offered (unlikely) and not be in the EU at all if our people decide to withdraw after we have independence within the EU.
131

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 15:00:01
123
Andrew Morton

"The EU is where the real power lies, not little domestic parliaments such as Westminster or Holyrood."

That is nonsense based on a perception which owes more to (Atlanticist) anti-European propaganda than reality. It is a bit like saying local councils are irrelevant because "real power" lies with Holyrood or Westminster.

Government operates ad many different levels, from the community through the regional and national levels all the way up to the international level. What is important is that government at whatever level should be as close to the governed as is compatible with its functional effectiveness at that level.

The EU is simply another level of government. A level which is necessary in a global age. It does not make national governments redundant. It merely facilitates cooperation and coordination between and among those governments.

What the EU does make redundant is a lower-level union founded on anachronistic imperialist terms. To whatever extent Scotland ever needed the UK as a framework for its relationship with England, that function is now far more effectively and equitably served by eqal partnership within the political structures and institutions of the EU.

Scotland's future is independence within the EU.

132

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 15:03:45
126
Scottish and Proud

"In Scotland the people are sovereign in UK Westminster is sovereign."

You are right to note the difference in ethos. The concept of parliamentary sovereignty has never sat well with the people of Scotland. Even those who do not fully understand the difference intuitively tend to favour the idea of the sovereignty of the people.

133

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 15:10:48
130
Jonas Jonaitis

"The EU is not democratic..."

An absolutist position which totally disregards that fact that all democracies are imperfect. I would not disagree that the EU, as it is presently constructed, may be considered more imperfect than many other democracies. But if imperfection is cause for destroying an institution then all institutions contrived by fallible human being must be doomed.

We do not abandon our democratic institutions simply because they are less than we would wish them to be. Rather, we seek to make them all that we would wish them to be. There is absolutely no good reason why this should not apply to the structures of the EU just as it does Westminster or Holyrood or even our local authorities.

134

,

26/06/2009 15:12:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
135

Jonas Jonaitis,

26/06/2009 15:13:32
131: Andrew Morton

Did we elect the president of the EU, no. Will we be electing the next EU president, which will be that utter idiot tony blair. Do you actually think that all these elected MEP's hold any real power in the EU. I think not, half the time they don't know what they are voting on.
136

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 15:14:18
133
Nicky Tam

You paint a striking picture of our resident unionists. One which I shall find it difficult to avoid calling to mind while reading their inane rants.

137

Jonas Jonaitis,

26/06/2009 15:20:00
'Scotland's future is independence within the EU'.

Where is the logic in wanting to leave one small union (the UK) but at the same time wanting to be part of an even bigger union (the EU)?
138

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 15:22:19
139
Jonas Jonaitis

"Did we elect the president of the EU, no. Will we be electing the next EU president, which will be that utter idiot tony blair. Do you actually think that all these elected MEP's hold any real power in the EU. I think not, half the time they don't know what they are voting on."

To whatever extent there may be truth in what you say, we are faced with three clear choices. We can sit on the sidelines whining and

We can secede from the EU. In which case we will be left sitting on the sidelines sniping like the Little Englanders and assorted Europhobes while having to adopt EU regulation and pay into the EU budget just as Norway and Switzerland do but with absolutely no say in how the regulations are formulated or how the budget is spent. I leave you to work out whether that os more or less democratic.

Or we can fully commit to and engage with the EU for the purpose of driving change from within and making it what we would wish it to be while enjoying the benefits of full access world's largest single market.

I didn't have much difficulty choosing.

139

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 15:23:40
138
spagan

"Westminster is the layer that adds least value and increasingly causes us most hassle - let alone embarrassment."

Very well put.

140

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 15:24:54
141
Jonas Jonaitis

"Where is the logic in wanting to leave one small union (the UK) but at the same time wanting to be part of an even bigger union (the EU)?"

I don't know that I can explain it in any simpler terms.

141

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 15:39:59
141 The logis is if we are offered acceptable terms we stay and if not we leave,same as we are doing with the UK.
142

Fitba Krazy,

26/06/2009 15:42:54
Yeah 1,

Are you suggesting that due to a £2300 bed settee Scotland should forego Independence from Westminster and continue to allow a neighbouring Country's capital to "arbitrate" for, control and denigrate our country and stymie our ambitions?

In a proper Union the Scottish Parliament would be equal to the English one, not closed down for 300 years and it's people subjugated and forced to adhere to the wishes of it's neighbour. Don't you agree?
143

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 26/06/2009 15:47:06
Is Annabel getting cold feet?

Why is she trying to slow down the whole process?
144

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 16:11:39
147
connaughtboy

"Is Annabel getting cold feet?

Why is she trying to slow down the whole process?"

There was never supposed to be a "process". The Tory/BLP alliance had not planned for such a thing. The Calman Commission was a knee-jerk reaction to the election of an SNP government and the launch of the National Conversation.

To whatever extent it was thought through at all, the Tory/BLP alliance probably envisaged the Scottish government collapsed by now; Holyrood in disarray; the unionist cabal back in power and Calman quietly side-lined.

Instead, Alex Salmond and his team go from strength to strength; it is Westminster that is in disarray; the BLP vote has collapsed and Calman has unexpectedly turned out to have teeth which are busy biting Goldie's doubtless fragrant bum.


145

Media at One,

26/06/2009 16:22:41
I am a fan of the union and I dont want independence for Scotland. But I would say it makes sense for Scottish parliament to have power over these particular issues.
We need that referendum, let the people decide and let's get on with it either way.
146

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 16:35:14
149 Media at One-howsit Bru! Looking forward to the game tomorrow!?

Calman is more piecemeal stuff. Better to have a full constitutional conference and examine all the options and submit the alternatives to the electorate.

140 Electric hermit and 133 Nicky Tam-the content of your posts is far more likely to harden Unionist opinion than convert it!!

I know lots of this is just good clean letting off steam but all this "inane rants" and "Unionist trolls " stuff is a little over the top!
147

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 26/06/2009 16:36:56
every single day more and more people are waking up to the fact that Westminster is no longer fit for purpose for ANY part of the UK.

We either have to have the most radical reform imaginable to Westminster or we opt for total Independence in Europe.
148

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 16:41:13
150
Geoff

"...the content of your posts is far more likely to harden Unionist opinion than convert it!!"

I see no reason why this should be so. Besides, there are few if any unionists posting here whose minds are open enough to be persuaded of anything.

149

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 16:42:42
151
Scottish and Proud

"We either have to have the most radical reform imaginable to Westminster..."

Radical as in making it the parliament of Rump-UK.

150

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 16:47:06
152 Electric hermit-I suspect that there are few on either side of the debate that are open to conversion-could you see yourself becoming a Unionist?
151

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

26/06/2009 16:49:14
#148 Electric Hermit - "There was never supposed to be a "process"."


The Scotland Act or whatever they called the devolution legislation, was supposed to be "The Settled Will of the Scottish People", according to the pseudo Father of our Nation.

Kind of blew up in their faces, I'm happy to say.

Now they have given us a taste, I think they will experience a process of looking progressively more ludicrous and less relevant, as they keep rummaging in their goody bag, hopping to find something that will quell our appetite for self government.
152

ukrefusenik,

lambeth walk 26/06/2009 16:50:33
# 149 ,i am a fan of normal nationhood , and i dont wish to remain subservient to a larger neighbour , but i would say it makes sense for the scottish parlie to have the power to hang grahamski by his heels and order the blue blanket to throw clootie dumplings at him ,
love, hans solo x x x
p s . may the force be with us in 2010
153

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 16:53:29
154
Geoff

"...could you see yourself becoming a Unionist?"

I can't be sure. No unionist has ever tried to present me with a positive case for the union. All they have ever done is call me names and tell me scary stories about the dire consequences that would befall if Scotland seceded.

The names don't impress me. I'm generally far better at concocted telling epithets than they are.

And the scare stories don't scare me. I'm quite capable of working out for myself what the possible consequences of secession are. And none of those consequences is in the slightest bit dire.

154

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 16:55:42
149 You are correct in that the only fair view is consult the people and the result determines three things
1) Do we stay in the UK as measured today
2) Do we declare independence as measured today
3) Is another referendum needed and does it give some indication of when that might be.

If you support the principle of consultation on one day then you must acknowledge the same for any day.

Whether we ask again and when we do so are still to be determined but the result is only binding as long as the people say it is .
If they subsequently change their mind then the majority held view which holds us into Union also releases us from Union. You cannot have a measure of public opinion and you only agree with its findings if you are the majority. Agreed?
155

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 16:57:13
155 the Colonel of monte Cristo- in the sixties in canada Diefenbaker accused the Liberals of promoting "Creeping Republicanism" by inter alia, removing the Queens portrait from some bank notes etc.. "Creeping Independence" seems to be in progress under the SNP! I agree with your assesment that the way things stand there is a danger(from my Unionist perspective) of a growing"appetite for self government".But this is a messy process. I think that an all embracing UK wide Constitutional conference is essential to fix up the half baked Devolution excercise. From that some kind of finality can be reached. Again from my personal viewpoint I would like to see 4 equal parliaments with maxi internal powers but retaining Westminster as a proper British Federal parliament.
156

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 16:59:41
155
The Col. of Monte Cristo

"...as they keep rummaging in their goody bag, hopping to find something that will quell our appetite for self government."

Reminds me of a story I read many years ago in which a man, beset by carnivorous birds, attempted to placate them with pieces of flesh cut from his own body.

I think there was a moral to this tale.

157

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:03:09
159
Geoff

"I think that an all embracing UK wide Constitutional conference is essential..."

The future governance of Scotland is a matter for the people of Scotland. No-one else has a say.

158

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 17:05:28
157 electric hermit-I have never believed that scotland was incapable of governing itself and agree that some of the Labour governments scare tactics were both patronising and ultimately counter productive in their attempts to defend the Union. I believe for many reasons-history geography culture and language amongst them,that the Union is worth retaining but we are all going over old ground here. I agree with media at one . We need to formulate some well thought out alternatives. These will properly reduce in simple terms to A. Independence B> the Status Quo C. A reformed Union with greater but equal decentralisation. I would think that C. would win hands down in a vote.
159

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/06/2009 17:08:37
#93, Grahamski.

You ARE a mentalist.

In the context of mainstream UK politics, if you are not a Nationalist you are a Unionist.

If you wish to discuss the position of your choice, "sindicated anarchism" then that is something different.

The inherent stupidty in your comments is becoming more and, more pronounced.
160

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 17:09:46
161 Electric hermit-of course the future governance of Scotland is for Scots to decide but de facto and de jure Scotland is part of the UK and she would need for many obvious reasons, to negotiate with her partners if the union were to be disolved. In addition, and with respect,you are arrogant (mean that in the nicest poss way) to assume that all scots share your views. You and many of your supporters here are too quick to insult and dismiss the opinion of many other Scots in this matter.
161

hoblar,

26/06/2009 17:10:57

"I know lots of this is just good clean letting off steam but all this "inane rants" and "Unionist trolls " stuff is a little over the top!"

No it isn't-look at the amount of posts by the very few sad trollers, and the quality is lacking.

It is a waste of time attempting to 'convert' a unionist blowhard, but there has been a change in Scottish voting practices that demonstrates that voting for the SNP is the most serious and invigorating choice Scotland has.

As for the unionist few, posting dozens of times negatively, they are the ones who put people off in their droves, and let's be honest, they live in a clownish land where their own political party (labour) is in the political doldrums with unprecedented unpopularity.

Again, if you look at selected token troll comments like the very sad negative gramski, do tell us all where the unionist philosophy is that will have people in Scotland queuing around the block to vote in these new labour failures?

The argument against the union has increased, the argument for Independence and certainly the popularity of the SNP has increased as well.

This is what the reality is within Scottish politics.

162

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 17:11:08
154 If the Union was to declare Scotland an equal and non disadvantaged member of the UK under federalism perhaps we might all at least consider retention of the UNION .We are perfectly willing to negotiate terms within continued EU membership after all.
Unfortunately The UK of GB & NI does not work that way.It never has.
Its a hypothetical question but only just within the boundaries of possibility.
Realistically it can never happen or it already would have.We are at breaking point now and the level of support for independence continues to grow.That is why they dare not measure it! They know it might be a yes right now! If they want to put their money where their mouth is HOLD A REFERENDUM .They held two on devolution!

The only reason to withold consultation is you fear the outcome and that means you abuse democracy and confirm you are NOT FIT to govern ever again.

I dont know what Electric Hermit thinks but I am bound to say ....................................NO.
163

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:17:13
162
Geoff

"A reformed Union with greater but equal decentralisation. I would think that C. would win hands down in a vote."

You may be correct that such a settlement would find approval with the UK electorate as whole. But the future governance of Scotland is not to be decided by the UK electorate as whole. It is entirely a matter for the people of Scotland.

It is far less certain that they would settle for such cosmetic reform. And even if they did, it would merely be another part of a process leading to secession. Just like devolution.

164

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 17:23:37
166 Morris-hi morris.

I am all for a referendum but I would like to see the overhaul of the political structures in the islands of britain and ireland debated properly and comprehensively,respecting and taking into account the widest possible range of opinions. remeber , this is not just about scotland-the other three partners also have issues that need addressing so it would make sense to do this as part of a wide process. the level of political understanding is poor amongst electorates generally. with somehing as important as this issue it is essential that as many as possible are made aware of the alternatives and have time o consider them.
Even unionist Trolls have rights?
165

Miss H,

26/06/2009 17:24:27
162 That is all very well but you need someone to make the case for option C.

What we are seeing here is that even when everybody is in agreement – the SNP and the Calman parties – about devolving the powers identified in the Calman Report (which could possibly be the precursor to Option C) there is no agreement from them about actually doing it. There is absolutely no reason why most of those powers should not be devolved immediately since there is no intention to put them to a referendum. (The taxation powers are different because there are still big questions about how they would work and what the point would be.)

The reason for the lack of political will by the Calman parties to back their own proposals is simple – the only reason they came up with Calman in the first place is because they saw it as a way of neutralising the SNP, not because they believed in what they were doing.

It was, as SNP supporters always suspected, a politically motivated fudge. Rather than thinking about what powers could most usefully be devolved and what those powers could be used for, their prime motivation was to think up a way of cutting the rug from under the SNP.

It seems they did not foresee that the SNP would say OK we will support your report, let’s get on with it. A stupid mistake but one which reflects the politically motivated nature of this whole exercise.
166

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:25:10
164
Geoff

"of course the future governance of Scotland is for Scots to decide but de facto and de jure Scotland is part of the UK and she would need for many obvious reasons, to negotiate with her partners if the union were to be disolved."

We are not talking about dissolution of the union. We are talking about Scotland seceding from that union. There would, of course, be negotiations involved. But not on the basis you suppose.

"In addition, and with respect,you are arrogant (mean that in the nicest poss way) to assume that all scots share your views."

I make no such assumption. If I did, there would hardly be any point in me arguing for secession, would there?

"You and many of your supporters here are too quick to insult and dismiss the opinion of many other Scots in this matter."

Everybody is entitled to an opinion. But not all opinions are equally valid. Informed opinion trumps mindlessly petty propagandising every time. We see precious little of the former from unionists and enough of the latter for it to have become patience-testingly tedious.

167

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 17:27:22
164 Nobody assumes anything in the Nationalist ranks,That's why we want a referendum .It establishes beyond any question what level of support exists on that particular day.

The terms of the separation are subject to negotiation but Scotland is one of the oldest existing national identities and we have automatic recognition by United Nations (provided we can show we have measured this).
Whether we leave or not has bog all to do with the Westminster parliament in that they have identical legality to the representatives of Scotland and presumably they will become the Edinburgh parliament.

People seem to think London can dictate outwith United Nations agreements which the UK is signatory to.
As I understand this Edinburgh and London would be equal as capital cities of two independent nations.
London negotiates with Edinburgh as much as Edinburgh negotiates with London.
Because Unionist politicians say this is not so, it does not imply that they are correct,only that they are disingenuous. Opinion on these matters has been sought with EU and UN representatives on a number of occasions and I have yet to hear anyone from outwith the UK who was in a position to know ,say differently.Ive heard numerous Professors confirm the procedure favours the SNP in exactly the way they claim it does.
We shall see,but I'm confident Scotland is secure in every sense of the word.Even senior Unionists like John Biffen confirmed it was so.

Opinions differ on this but usually for expediency .

The legal position is the one which matters.
168

Miss H,

26/06/2009 17:27:47
36 Keep doing what we are doing now.
169

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 17:28:55
The unionists all got together for Calman and now they are all falling apart over the conclusions..laughable!
170

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 17:30:00
167 electric hermit- it may very well be part of a proccess leading to seccesion but on the other hand a Dev max solution may just take the wind out of the sails of the nationalist cause. Nationalist causes have stalled elsewhere as in Spain and Canada when dev max solutions have been tried. I say all of this not to try to persuade you guys-(Morris isnt going to become a convert to britannia!)but you have to concede that there are many possible endings to this story and it might not be the one that you(or I) necesarily want!
171

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:30:23
166
morris

"I dont know what Electric Hermit thinks but I am bound to say ....................................NO."

I presume you refer to the "federal" option. In which case, my answer would be a polite, "No, thank you."

This is in contrast to my answer to the status quo option. Which would be just as firmly negative, but considerably less courteous.

172

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:34:29
168
Geoff

"remeber , this is not just about scotland-the other three partners also have issues that need addressing..."

Yes it is "just about scotland". The other three "partners" must likewise decide upon the settlement that they want.

I will say it again. The future governance of Scotland is a matter for the people of Scotland AND NO-ONE ELSE!

173

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 17:34:59
175 Duidelijk !
174

Nevsky;,

Moscow 26/06/2009 17:37:10
175 Hermit*

As McNeil pointed out 'federal' for the Fid Dems means 'federal but run from Westminster'...so it is a hoot hearing that Tavish Scott claims that he is not a unionist!

175

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 17:42:11
178 Indeed ! Tavish does not know what he is,which is why they made him leader (in Scotland)of a party which does not know what it is either.
176

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 17:43:22
169 Miss H-I agree with your assesment of calman-half baked,unrepresentative and patronising!! But this is my point. Many of you Nats may feel the means justifies the end but this ad hoc calman type spat and counter sppat with a bit here and a bit there is such a dreadful way to address this issue. Half baked half thought out carried out with increasing rancour and resentment amongst all parties. Surely it makes sense to address this process in a proper and civilised manner? Even if scotland does become independent would it not make sense to achieve this in a good spirit and in friendship?
Also morris 171-I think that you and other Nationalist posters make too much of the idea that London might obstruct Scotland if she expressed a desire to become Independent. I am absolutely sure that,if after reasonable negotiations,Scotland opts for independence, England ,Ni nor Wales would stand in her way.

I am sure that the next british PM the Anglo Scot David Cameron would wish her well, albeit with immense sadness.
177

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:44:43
174
Geoff

"...but you have to concede that there are many possible endings to this story..."

What you call "Dev max" would not be an ending. If you imagine the nationalist movement in Scotland is just going to fade away, then you really don't understand it at all.

And let us not forget that what we have at present was supposed to be "Dev max". It was supposed to be an "ending" - with the unionists vehemently insisting that there was neither the need nor the demand for further devolution. Then, in 2007 and in virtually every poll since, the Scottish electorate told them differently. So they cobbled together the Calman Commission in an attempt to find a new "Dev max".

Follow the process to its logical conclusion.

178

Alan B,

26/06/2009 17:45:55
What is the point of the unionist having calman if they will not implement its recommendations. Particularly given that nothing is controversial and few powers are really being devolved.

The 3 unionist parties need to work out what they actually stand for. They all seem to be all over the place.
179

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/06/2009 17:47:45
#162, Geoff.

Where your argument falls down is the Treaty of Union.

This was/is a Treaty (contract) between 2 (two) sovereign states thus, there is no need for one to consult with the other about resiling the contract.

Ireland, in a similar, but not equal, situation gives us a guide in this situation.

Obviously there will be discussion about the disposition of assets and debts but, in law, that is all that is required.
180

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:50:16
180
Geoff

"Surely it makes sense to address this process in a proper and civilised manner?"

That is what the SNP has been doing for decades. Opposition to the SNP has tended to be, shall we say, less politic.

"Even if scotland does become independent would it not make sense to achieve this in a good spirit and in friendship?"

Such has always been the intention. We wish you luck as we wave you good-bye.

181

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 17:52:46
177
morris

I had to look it up. But your point is made.
182

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 17:53:45
182 Alan b-hi Alan.

Not to repeat myself but i agree with you about Calman. Any process or Commission that excludes either the Nationalists or Unionists in Scotland not only lacks credibility but is bound to fail

181 electric hermit-if you imagine the nationalist movement is just going to fade away! Fighting talk EH!!

Maybe the unionist movement might also not just fade away!
Anyway time for supper. thank you for an interesting exchange of views! :)

What u think of Michael jackson? Worthy of at leat some compassion?
183

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 26/06/2009 17:54:59
As a Nationalist I welcome the extra powers recommended by Calman. I see it as a move closer to full independence.

I think the unionist parties are scared $h1tle$$ of transferring the powers. They fear they are losing control.
184

Alan B,

26/06/2009 17:57:33
#Geoff

I agree a proper dev max could be a proper solution. One based on full fiscal autonomy and devolution of social security etc, along with cleaning out mess where we are meant to have a separate legal system but no power over say drug policy, Dito for transport etc.

The problem with dev max is:
1)no party is advocating it and likely to deliver it.
2)what powers should be held centrally and for what purpose? There is independence symbolically but indepdendence to a large degree is political independence. ie the ability to make your own decisions. if we are to pull decision making then scotland needs to be politically in general agreement with england over such issues as eu, foreign policy, defence (nuclear and wars).
3)england needs to be prepared to sort out its governance to allow/create dev max. so far england has rejected devolution ie regionalisation and not shown an appetite for its own parliament.

Part of the issue with britain is it not a union of england, scotland, ni, and wales, but a union of england with scotland, england with ni, and england with wales.

4)with the eu, has it not superceded any need for the uk union particularly if we have dev max.


Look at it from another angle. England rejects the euro for narrow political reasons. So within the uk scotland has no choice but to use sterling even if it is harmful to our economy.

A pro eu england joining the euro with fiscal autonomy for scotland would reduce many of the practical reasons for independence.

But it is not going to happen and even if it did what would the advantage be of remaining with in the uk anyway.
185

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

26/06/2009 17:58:12
#159 Geoff,sa

UK wide constitutional change would only ever be on the table if the English wanted it to be, the fact that it has never been considered would tend to suggest that they have never seen any need for change and couldn't realy care less what the Irish, Scots or Welsh want.

The Federal suggestion you made should on the face of it, be acceptable-ish to most.

But again it does not register anywhere on the scale of English National consiousness...so it has no chance of ever happening.

Unless the Unionists can convince the English that it is the last chance to save the Union...and they give a shi*t, which I don't think they do, besides many in England would think Federalism to high a price to pay, just to keep some haggis eaters and sheep sh*ggers happy.

Regards
Col Blimp IV*
186

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:00:32
186
Geoff

"Maybe the unionist movement might also not just fade away!"

Doubtless there will be a few Blimpish die-hards waving union flags and singing "Rule! Britannia!" as they vanish into the mists of history. We should all try very hard not to laugh at them.

187

frank mcbride,

lusitania 26/06/2009 18:01:12
#180, Geoff.

That is on of the most Sophist(icated) arguments that I have heard from a Unionist.

"...in a proper and civilised manner?".

The age-old recipe for inaction/tinkering.

We are living through your argued position; Calman is an example, granted an uninspiring one, of your "let's discuss it civilly" approach.

Westminster does not do "civilised discussion".
188

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:01:42
186
Geoff

"What u think of Michael jackson? Worthy of at leat some compassion?"

Off-topic!

http://tiny.pl/36hz

189

bluehead,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 18:01:50
does no one smell a rat here?,let's face it there is
plenty of them around to smell,
I would advise anybody involved to read the detail,for that is where all the misery is hidden,
remember this is all about politics,and as we all know by know you can't get anything more twisted than that
lot
Beware!!!!!!!!
190

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:03:01
191
frank mcbride

"Westminster does not do "civilised discussion"."

That is a sad truth.

191

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:05:57
189
The Col. of Monte Cristo

"...besides many in England would think Federalism to high a price to pay, just to keep some haggis eaters and sheep sh*ggers happy."

Sad to say, that would almost certainly be an all too common attitude.

192

Alan B,

26/06/2009 18:06:22
#Geoff

My point was not about the unionist excluding the nats within calman. I do not have a problem with calman being a unionist response to the nats push for independence which they then can offer to the people as an improved union to encourage the people of scotland to support the union.

My point was what do the tories, labour or the lib dems actually believe in such an important issue. Both the tories and labour seem split and just reactive to the snp rather than supporting a specfic constitutional settlement for scotland within the union.

Brown and labour were anti more powers before the last election. Then they were for more powers. Then brown called the commission a review and scuppered the process. It is not clear what labour really think of devolution beyond not liking it when they lose power and seem to support it thwart the nats not for scotlands improved governance. There does not seem to be a support of devolution for devolution sake like the libs who do not have the power of their convictions.

The tories are also confused. Some do not like devolution, they did not want it in the first place. Some just do not want the constitution to be an issue despite the fact the tories are conceptually a devolution party ie get powers to the lowest level. Major used the term subsidiarity when talking of the eu. A few tories do seem to support the concept and fraser the deputy has spoken previously of fiscal autonomy and federalism.
193

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 18:09:29
183 frank McBride-thanks for the info frank. I would just ask the nationalist camp to accept that there is a valid Unionist perspective and following in scotland and that a vote in favour of Independence is by no means assured in a referendum. At the same time the UK as presently constituted is a mess as a result of an ill thought out devolution process. So surely it makes sense to bring all the peoples of the United kingdom around the table to examine all the possible(within reason) alternatives to fix this constitutional mes holistically.. These solutions would obviously include an option for full Independence for any or all of the "Home" nations and kill a few birds with one well aimed stone. One can not just ride roughshod over those who might not support full independence and may very well form a majority.
194

Media at One,

26/06/2009 18:09:52
Geoff
Looking fwd to it pal. It is freeezing in Pretoria, another cold front from the cape has hit. It will be gone by Wednesday.
I see the Boks winning by 15.

In terms of the issue at hand, so much has been said, so much has been debated and a referendum is needed. I am a fan of the union, that may be good, it may be bad. But at the end of the day only the people of Scotland should determine their future and nobody else.
I am interested to note though. If the Scots vote to remain in the union do the SNP still pursue independence? Or will they respect the wishes of the people?
195

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 26/06/2009 18:10:35
I find it veru amusing that whilst the corrupt westminster is portrayed as corrupt and useless. Many posters would gladly see further integration of Scotland within the EU. An organisation so corrupt that it makes westminster look like the vatican. An organisation in favour of such heavy handed controls and foreign and economic policy entirely designed to suit france and germany it would make London look pro Scottish. At least westminster knows where Scotland is, we would be even more swallowed up in the corrupt sinister hellhole that is the EU.
196

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:16:24
196
Alan B

"Major used the term subsidiarity when talking of the eu."

I think you'll find that the principle of subsidiarity (along with the principle of proportionality) pre-dates John Major by a few decades. It was one of the founding principles when the EC/EU was first established.

197

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 18:17:06
Ah well-the bottom line-if a majority of Scots want Independence, they shall have it.
If they dont,they wont!!

192 electric hermit-like you guys never go off topic!!
198

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:17:21
URL which should have been included in #200 -

http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/subsidiarity_en.htm

199

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:20:07
197
Geoff

"So surely it makes sense to bring all the peoples of the United kingdom around the table to examine all the possible(within reason) alternatives to fix this constitutional mes holistically."

Too late! This would now be seen as just another tactic to delay the inevitable. Much like Calman.

200

Alan B,

26/06/2009 18:20:35
#All Politicians

My problem with westminster is the vast over centralisation and i also see the eu as having superceded the need for the uk ie better to be a member on our own right. It is not because of corrutpion at westminster.

While the eu is not perfect i do like many aspects of it.

1)single market and much of the harmonisation that brings. (we would not all drive on different sides of the road, having different plugs etc if these issues came about now). It is good to have common safety standards and environmental for consumer goods and cars etc.
2)a common currency. the euro would also in my opinion be better for the scottish economy as seem be the last 30yrs (DM monetary policy pre euro).
3)freedom of movement of people within the eu.

I am not so pro the social chapter but understant that the eu is a compromise. ie accept the right wing single market then for the left to give up socialism and protectionism then it must be underwriten by employee safety standards etc.

I also think the eu is in a better place if we could develop round foreign policy, some common defence and global environmental issues. For instance it was a shamble for the european countries to be the us to sort out yugoslavia. The eu should be able to deal with peace keeping issues etc and try to stablise neighbouring countries.
201

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 18:21:13
129 You are correct in that the sensible Labour people have either already left,or will soon.The majority of those still there (Ive heard from a member who I was told was a former member of their National Executive that their membership is seriously depleted and they expect more defections)but that was said in private of course and its understood I cannot put a name to it,plus he/she would have to deny it.Those who are not already in the SNP would indeed be a progressively harder nut to crack,and maybe see themselves as cutodians of a sperate Labour Party in Scotland.The point is if Scotland continues what she has already started they will have no other choice and even Labour cannot be that stupid .............or can they?

They presumably will contest in Scotland ! Whether they get many votes or not is another matter.
Presumably it depends upon how late they wait until the day dawns on them ?
202

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 18:21:21
198 media- I think you are right about the Bokke but whatever hopefully a good game!

see you at billys for the currie cup!!

Also-your last sentence-that is the 64000 dollar question!
203

Media at One,

26/06/2009 18:21:24
As long as the Boks win it really doesnt matter though!
204

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:23:28
198
Media at One

"If the Scots vote to remain in the union do the SNP still pursue independence?"

Of course they do! Does democracy involve holding one election and keeping whatever party is elected indefinitely?

Or does democracy involve offering people choices - as many and as often as possible?

205

Alan B,

26/06/2009 18:24:03
#Electric

I never said major was original. But when major was arguing over an eu treaty in the 90s he used the concept.

Many tories in england strongly support the devolution of powers, getting powers to the lowest level, getting central government out the way.

But not for scotland. That is when their ideology seems to go into reverse and they support the centralisation of powers in westminster.
206

Media at One,

26/06/2009 18:28:40
Helmet -
I suppose so, but if the majority vote against independence it seems a little odd that the SNP would continue to push for it.
But democracy says they can, so I guess nothing wrong in doing so.
207

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 18:29:11
189 Col of monte Cristo- Blimp old chap-nice to hear from you! Nice post :)

207 Media at one- although a Lions win would make the last test a hummdinger!!
208

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:31:48
204
Alan B

"While the eu is not perfect i do like many aspects of it."

An eminently sensible attitude, if I may say so.

I particularly concur with your remarks regarding what I would term European- or global-level issue, i.e. foreign policy, defence etc. This is where the EU should be doing more in order to become established as a counterweight to other world powers - many of which urgently need to be reigned in.

A stronger, more united EU might have been able to prevent the Iraq tragedy, for example.

209

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 26/06/2009 18:32:06
It seems we have a lot of what you want already. i am no economist(though they never agree anyway) but I cannot understand how EU economic policy driven by two countries larger than the Uk can be better for Scotland than what we have now. I am in favour of the EURO but if the arguement that the Uk is too big for economic policy to be set to suit Scotland how will the EU be different. As for common foreign policy, very difficult. france sees itself as a post colnial power with great influence in areas of Africa. germany does not want to get involved anywhere as she still feels war guilt. the Uk has an Atlantisist approach trying to bridge the gap between the US and EU nut will back the US first. Spain was a fascit dictatorship up until 30 years ago whilst Italy is a mess.
210

Alan B,

26/06/2009 18:33:21
#Media

It is difficult to know what would happen with the snp if an independence referendum was rejected. But they would respect the democratic wishes of the majority (while still desiring independence)

I suspect the snp would realign as a dev max party while saying the people of scotland has spoken and push independence to the long grass. Similar to the welsh party.

You would probably get a splinter independence group taking a more fundamentalist line but they probably would die off quickly unless they could take significant amount of public support.

Much would probably depend on the strength of opinion ie was it a close result. And whether it was seen as fair etc.

The problem with fairness at the moment would be round the fact the bbc is just labour mouth piece and the press are hardly going to put both sides.
211

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:37:03
209
Alan B

"I never said major was original."

I apologise if I misunderstood. But I was very glad of the opportunity to bring the concept of subsidiarity into the discussion. For me, it is the crucial principle underpinning good governance. And while it me be only poorly applied within the EU, it is barely even acknowledged by the obsessively centralist establishment in London.

212

Media at One,

26/06/2009 18:37:12
Alan B #214 - Good post, you make a lot of sense.
213

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:38:16
210
Media at One

"Helmet..."

You just opted out of the grown-up discussion. Bye!

214

Media at One,

26/06/2009 18:40:22
bye
215

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 18:43:59
214 Alan B-I would think that a worse possible outcome would be for the issue to fester for decades a la Quebec! It is really difficult to seperate the Independence issue out of the general political climate in the UK at present. The SNP led by the affable Alex Salmond have exploited Labours current troubles to the full. With the Tories historical baggage in scotland and the strange malaise afflicting the liberals, the SNP have slotted nicely into the vacant spot. How much of their new found support is protest vote or local support as opposed to genuine support for full independence is the intriguing question.
216

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 18:46:01
218 Media at one-"Helmet" was a typo hey?
:):):)
217

Geoff,

sa 26/06/2009 18:47:07
Eclectic Hamlet?
218

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:50:41
214
Alan B

"I suspect the snp would realign as a dev max party while saying the people of scotland has spoken and push independence to the long grass."

That would not be the SNP. The SNP is a nationalist party whose ultimate objective is secession from the union. Some splinter group might take the path you suggest. But it would not be the SNP.

A referendum is only binding until the next referendum. And so long as democracy prevails, the people will always have the right to change their mind. While the principle of self-determination and a distinctive national identity exist there will always be someone offering the people the choice of independence.

The principle of self-determination is enshrined in international law, as well as in enlightened human consciousness.

Scotland's sense of national identity has survived centuries of relentless efforts to suppress and eradicate it.

Do you still think the SNP will just fade away?

219

Alan B,

26/06/2009 18:52:20
#All Politicians

For me what currency we use should be based on the economic arguments and not political. I see no cultural benefit to having a scottish pound, sterling or the euro. It must be driven by what it does for employment and living standards.

Scotland has 3 options none are perfect.
1)scottish currency: gives the best monetary policy ie interest rates are set for scottish economic needs. But it suffers from currency fluxations with both the euro and sterling zones.
2)sterling:problem is interest rates have been too high for the scottish economy over the last 30/40yrs at least. Much of this is to do with the north south divide with an over heating south and slowing growing north. Also to do with the uks housing market. Remeber the governor of the bank of england said that higher unemployment in the north was a price worth paying to keep inflation in the overheating south down. I understand why he said this so it is not to make a cheap political point. Governments have simply not used other tools to stop the overheating and inflationary pressure in the south as they are not politically acceptable. They have not addressed the north south divide a prerequisite for a currency union. It also has the fluxation issues with the sterling zone making export more expensive and risky.
3)euro: to me the best of the 3. The euro and DM beforehand has generally had lower interest rates than sterling and also removes the currency fluxations with the euro zone.

Euro interest rates would never be set for scotlands needs. But if you look at the interest rates and compare them over the past 30yrs you can see that they are more inline with our economic needs.

It would help if the uk government would publish scottish inflation so that we could clearly see what monetary policy is needed. But for political reasons they do not.

The fluxation issues with sterling means that it would be best for scotland if the whole uk were to join the euro zone.
220

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 18:54:23
221
Geoff

"Eclectic Hamlet?"

It's all been done before. YAWN!

221

Alan B,

26/06/2009 18:57:21
#222 Electric

I am just saying what i think would happen but i do not know. Salmond for instance said a referendum would be a once in a generation thing. What is a generation? 15yrs?

The fact is from a practical sense the snp would never get the other unionist parties to support a referendum only 4yrs after the snp lost the first one. If that very unfortunate event were to happen.

So pragmatically i think they could push for a more phased direction to independence with fiscal autonomy etc.

But as i say i am guessing.
222

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 26/06/2009 18:57:50
#223

I agree with joining the Euro.
223

Alan B,

26/06/2009 19:12:46
#All Politicians

Regarding eu foreign and security policy.

I think the eu as one of the biggest economies in the world where many countries like to have access to that market gives it alot of power to influence others.

With also 4/500million odd can work together in peace keeping as none of the countries can do much themselves.

We can see how the eu is the biggest influence on eastern europe many who are now members. It is the eu that should take the lead and help the old yugo countries. It will be the eu who has influence on ukraine, georgia etc. And then to a large extent Russia over the next 30yrs.

If turkey becomes a member then the eu will border iran, iraq and syria.

While we can never fo back in time I would like to think that the eu working together (not singely but with a common approach) could have prevented sadam using chemical weapons on the kurds in 88. Or prevented the iraq/iran war. Help prevent the iranian islamic revolution that has lead to so many problems with iran.

The eu should have a much bigger influence on israel and palestine issue.

The eu neighbours in north africa include morroco (ex british colony), algeria (ex french colony), tunisia, libya and egypt. By working together they should try to encourage human rights, democracy underpinning it with economic prosperity even if for our own security and stopping the spread of militant islam.

The problem with wars is they are and should be the last option. It is only with the eu working together and using its influence that we can try to ensure peace and stability first in europe, then with surrounding and neighbouring countries and also look further a field in other global issues.

Working together to move away from oil dependency would stop throwing money at the bampot regimes who countries in the west sell weapons to in order to pay for it.
224

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 26/06/2009 19:19:50
#227

The problem is the common approach, unfortunately very often the UK, Germany and France do not have a common aim. It sounds great but the difficulties are immense.
225

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 19:22:17
225
Alan B

"Salmond for instance said a referendum would be a once in a generation thing. What is a generation? 15yrs?"

Depends whether you are talking about a cultural or a familial generation. Assuming the former, about 10-15 years would probably be about right. But cultural generation get shorter all the time.

But so what if it takes 15 years? Or 30? The drive for independence did not fade away in 300 years.

The SNP is not going to disappear. It is far too firmly established for that to be a relistic prospect. And so long as the SNP is around, there will be an ongoing campaign for secession.

But all of this is academic. The trend at present is towards secession at an accelerating pace. It is important that we maintain the momentum while taking things one step at a time.

226

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 19:27:13
228
All Politicians are the same

"The problem is the common approach, unfortunately very often the UK, Germany and France do not have a common aim. It sounds great but the difficulties are immense."

Germany and France are increasingly coming to a mutual accord on many foreign policy issues.

And the UK is all to often only "different" because it is not politic to be seen to be aligning with EU policy.

227

Nicky Tam,

THE FREE NATION OF SCOTLAND 26/06/2009 19:39:28
No one elected Sir Kenneth Calman. He is a be-knighted steward of the British Establishment and his remit is clear from the Unionist parties: come up with something to stop the trajectory towards independence. Anything will do. Handgun control is anything.

That his remit should ‘consider all the options ‘ except the view that is represented by the currently democratically elected Scottish Govt, who polled upwards of 40% at the latest election in some constituencies, is just bizarre, even by the terms of British historical chicanery.

It leads to the most honest analysis of the Calman Report being a commentator on the Scotman website who wrote: “With Calman you can ban handguns. With independence we could ban Trident.” This is the reality of the poxy paternalistic counter-intuitive nonsense dolled out by Calman to prop up the failed British State.

http://tinyurl.com/m69tae
228

dunedin bully wee 1877,

26/06/2009 20:11:44
225 Alan B

I would describe “a generation” as being nearer 25 years than 15 years.
(What age was your father when you were born?)

In any case, the SNP, or at least the principle behind the party, have been around for around, in one form or another, for over 300 years now.

The modern party has existed for 3 generations now, and has experienced a number of highs and lows during that time, but has never compromised upon our ultimate objective and has never gone away.

Should the forthcoming referendum not prove to return a positive result, we will merely regroup and try again.

As long as 100 of us remain alive, ............we are not ever going to go away.
229

Alanski2005,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 20:48:20
231 Nicky Tam*

Excellent point Nicky - this undemocratic farce that we have to suffer seems to be collapsing - the British state was built on exploitation, colonialism and lies, and is now a festering embarassment. Roll on Independence!
How about the dimwitted Scottish Labour Party coming to their senses and supporting home rule?? Sorry... i was just in fantasy land for a moment.
230

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 21:16:12
233
Alanski2005

"How about the dimwitted Scottish Labour Party coming to their senses and supporting home rule??"

There is no Scottish Labour Party. There is only the British Labour Party (BLP)

Having said that, for the BLP to support "home rule" would involve no more than reverting to the position they traditionally held. In the days when there was a distinctive Scottish Labour Party "home rule" for Scotland was one of its principal policies.

In the 1918 General Election, "home rule" for Scotland was one of the top items in Labour's manifesto. The policy remained one of Labour's election promises until they formed the government in 1945, when it was unceremoniously dumped.

It was not until the rise of SNP support in the 70s that Labour were forced to put devolution (as it was now called) back on their manifesto. Prior to that, their official position was that they would prefer a Tory government in London to a Labour government in Scotland.

Labour now tries to represent that it delivered devolution to Scotland. But it did so only after decades of lying to the Scottish electorate, and only after it was forced to do so by the SNP.

The British Labour Party has never been Scotland's friend. Nothing has changed.

231

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 21:20:21
198


The term settled will of the people is a term invented by Labour to try and maintain the Status Quo as much ( or failing that for as long) as is possible.

In a democracy there is no such animal and we are constantly evolving and consulting. Thats why we have elections.
The frequency of referenda are certainly going to be seldom unless there is a clear demand for a re run. Whether one should happen clearly depends upon wqhether a significant difference is a likely outcome.

Its really up to those who claim to be democratic to put their money where their mouth is and act in the best interests of the people before any party and that includes the SNP.

What the people want is what we shall have whether we like that or not.

Our duty is not to be independent or devolved or United,its to consult and be what the people desire at any given time as much as is practical.
We can debate the desirability of any arrangement, but we should never obstruct the peoples wishes to declare their preferences.
Former Lib Dem leader Nicol Stephen once said on radio "He had never known a single occasion where a political party had supported the use of referenda unless they knew the result in advance" That's one of the reasons why Nicolarse is no longer leader of course. People can see through the disingenuous and when they cannot the other parties will draw it to their attention as sure as night follows day.

What matters is that the people are afforded the opportunity to determine their own future and any attempt to prevent that will surely alienate that party and they may live to regret their stance.
Do whats right , not expedient.
Otherwise you declare your party to be unfit to contest in an independent Scotland and I have no desire to see any of Scotland's parties disappear completely. We need as many as we can if we are to be the democracy we all desire,irrespective of what its called or where it governs.
232

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

26/06/2009 21:26:54
"In the 1918 General Election, "home rule" for Scotland was one of the top items in Labour's manifesto. The policy remained one of Labour's election promises until they formed the government in 1945, when it was unceremoniously dumped.

It was not until the rise of SNP support in the 70s that Labour were forced to put devolution (as it was now called) back on their manifesto. Prior to that, their official position was that they would prefer a Tory government in London to a Labour government in Scotland.

Labour now tries to represent that it delivered devolution to Scotland. But it did so only after decades of lying to the Scottish electorate, and only after it was forced to do so by the SNP."


Isn't it strange how the Scottish absolutely Vilify the Tories yet the problems of Devolution etc as shown by #234 Electric Hermit are almost exclusively the fault of Labour!!!

How does that work then?
233

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 21:35:13
236
Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!

"Isn't it strange how the Scottish absolutely Vilify the Tories yet the problems of Devolution etc as shown by #234 Electric Hermit are almost exclusively the fault of Labour!!!"

Only because Labour has dominated the political scene in Scotland for half a century. The Tories were, of course, the party of the union - Conservative and Unionist Party. They never promised devolution. So at least they didn't lie.

But we should remember that there was a time when the Tories dominated Scottish politics. It was a time when the Scottish party was quite distinct from its English counterpart. It was more of a "Scottish" party than the so-called "Scottish Labour Party".

234

morris,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 21:41:02
234 You are correct in that all three parties have included HOME RULE as a policy at some point,but what level of committment existed was at best diluted as much as they could and meant to attract votes only.Even Labour who were arguably the least disingenuous of the three,had to be forced into devolution.They will probably be forced into a seperate nation screaming and kicking also,since a sizeable part of their membership has already given up or have joined the SNP and whats left now are unlikely to ever leave the sinking ship,prefering to prepare for the creation of a seperate party when they finally realise ITS OVER. I would say the writing is on the wall now, but that does not mean they can read what it says.
Maybe if Jackie Baillie sings they will finally get it?

They still have not worked out that the LABOUR Party used them and used Scotland anmd her people,and there are still some well intentioned but sadly illusioned people clinging to the faint hope that Labour can make a comeback. I think they have more chance of winning the lottery personally and all they do is delay what is now inevitable.
235

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 21:55:40
238
morris

"You are correct in that all three parties have included HOME RULE as a policy at some point..."

I don't think the Conservatives did. The closest they came was when Thatcher(?) stated independence made more sense than devolution. But that was in the context of opposition to any form of devolution.

236

Alanski2005,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 22:12:25
234 Electric Hermit

Aye, very good point. I recall a vague memory, reading that that a young Winston Churchill advocated Home Rule for Scotland before the 1st World War. Bizarre, given what we are dealing with now.

Agreed, the 'Scottish Labour Party' are puppets, and they could change that by supporting independence, but of course, they won't.
237

Fitba Krazy,

26/06/2009 22:33:03
Alanski2005,

"Aye, very good point. I recall a vague memory, reading that that a young Winston Churchill advocated Home Rule for Scotland before the 1st World War. Bizarre, given what we are dealing with now."

They purged the Scottish Workers when they demanded better conditions right after WW1. So much for any idea of Scottish people being respected within the Union eh?

http://tinyurl.com/5upfl6
238

Electric Hermit,

26/06/2009 22:52:01
240
Alanski2005

"I recall a vague memory, reading that that a young Winston Churchill advocated Home Rule for Scotland before the 1st World War."

Not sure how relevant the ancient history is. What is important is that people realise how the British Labour Party has deceived and manipulated them. It is important because it places their conduct today in a context.

239

Alanski2005,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 22:52:47
241 Fitba Crazy

Aye, no respect shown, just contempt. Still, what do you expect from a bunch of Imperialist scum. Nowadays, they have no empire, but still have fantasies of world power and influence by riding on the back of the current Imperialist power, the USA. Truly pathetic - the reason we have Trident in Scotland is because of US policy. It makes my flesh crawl.
240

Fitba Krazy,

26/06/2009 23:09:59
243 Alanski 2005,

It certainly looks like we have become subservient to the U.S. by default through Westminster control, or rather, the lack of it.

These weapons pollute Scotland and they the UK Gov. are planning on more similar stuff arriving soon as it nears it's use by date.

241

Jo Flo,

should be in andalucia, cranky 26/06/2009 23:55:51
over my best friend would I ever think about siding with the opposition

that lot give me so much angxt and entertainment, sweet and sour, but still I am saddened

lets let the poor floating souls some succor

"No!" said the captain.

Well you were warned.
242

Son-of-scotland,

ALBA 28/06/2009 01:30:53
as time moved on in politics, the party's will fight, and try get support for there party.

and as there motto says ,

when they divided, they will be conquered

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.