Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Labour MSPs force Wendy into another U-turn on referendum

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: 14 May 2008
WENDY Alexander's position as leader of the Scottish Labour Party was last night described as "impossible and untenable" after she was forced into yet another U-turn by her fellow MSPs.



In the latest extraordinary twist to the referendum saga, MSPs at a meeting of members of the Scottish Parliament's Labour group yesterday ditched Ms Alexander's weekend pledge that the party would not stand in the way of a referendum bill, instead either voting for it or abstaining.

It also reversed the position outlined by Duncan McNeil, the group chairman, last week when he said the MSPs would "not vote down any referendum bill that comes before this parliament".

The latest U-turn left the party in an almost identical position to ten days ago, before Ms Alexander first said she would support a referendum.

It led the Tories to compare Labour's policy to an infamous storyline in the TV soap Dallas, in which the death of a leading character was explained away as a dream.

Outlining the MSPs' new position, Mr McNeil said it was impossible to make any commitment to a bill which would not be introduced for another two years as the SNP did not want to put forward a referendum bill until 2010.

He confirmed that, contrary to suggestions made last week, Labour would not try to force the SNP's hand to bring forward a referendum bill early.

Mr McNeil added: "We reserve the right to scrutinise any bill that comes before this parliament."

A spokesman for Ms Alexander later said: "It all depends on the wording and the timescale of the bill."

And he insisted that Labour still supported a referendum on independence "in principle".

The Scotsman understands that the latest change of position came because many Labour MSPs were worried by a position which they saw as a blank cheque for the SNP, although Ms Alexander has always insisted she was not offering one to the Nationalists.

She had also told Labour MSPs last Tuesday that she had the support of the Prime Minister, an assertion she repeated in a television interview, but one which Mr Brown made clear was untrue in the Commons last Wednesday during Prime Minister's Questions.

Labour MSPs who are opposed to any referendum have now won a position allowing the party to vote against one, which is now the most likely outcome.

The latest shift was last night welcomed at Westminster, where Labour ministers had been holding their heads in despair at the issue.

A senior Westminster source said: "This is a huge relief. We haven't leaned on the MSPs to come to this position, they seem to have come to their senses by themselves.

"This is a much more sensible position than the one held before."

Malcolm Chisholm MSP, who was yesterday named the group's constitutional affairs spokesman, last night moved to defend the party's new position.

He said: "The SNP have turned down the chance to end the uncertainty facing Scotland and now will be at the mercy of Labour's parliamentary tactics."

However, David McLetchie, the chief whip of the Scottish Conservatives, was quick to compare Labour's latest moves to the much-maligned Dallas plot.

He said: "Whereas Pam woke up to find Bobby was still alive, the same cannot now be said of Scottish Labour as a credible opposition in this parliament."

Nicola Sturgeon, the deputy First Minister, added:

"Wendy Alexander has been utterly humiliated by the Labour group, who have effectively U-turned on her farcical U-turn. 'Bring it on' has been brought down, and Labour must now be very close to bringing Wendy Alexander down as their Holyrood leader.

"Her position is now impossible and completely untenable."

Nicol Stephen, leader of the Scottish Lib Dems, admitted he was bewildered by Labour's latest move.

He added: "Anyone trying to keep pace with Labour's ever-changing position would be driven to dizziness."


Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 13 May 2008 11:40 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish Labour Party
 
1

Angus Ogg,

13/05/2008 23:33:51

Wendy Alexander.

Resignation within 10 days.

Going,,,,, Going,,,,,
2

ochone,

Sauchie, Clack's 14/05/2008 00:04:35
Well we've got the panto, so I guess next up will be Scottish Labour, 'the musical'

3

Sanny,

14/05/2008 00:06:02
Hang about Angus - Wendy's the SNP's Exorcet missile to be used against the SLAB!!
Let's give the wee lassie some support - She's doing a wonderful job!
4

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 00:10:03
ah well guess who are all going to lose their seats at the next election.
5

,

14/05/2008 00:16:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Marky Bhoy,

Dunfermline 14/05/2008 00:21:22

Number 1 gone
7

,

14/05/2008 00:22:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 14/05/2008 00:23:55
The photo looks like she is praying for some divine intervention from Hamish Macdonnell, the Scotsman journalist who cannot bring himself to report on this.

Wonder why. Wonder why Wendy can only bring down the lightweights?

What I would also say is that if you shout "bring it on" you also have to bring it off. Eh no, Wendy.

Let us raise a toast to Wendy.

"Wendy, you're toast" Eh no, Hamish?

9

Senga Jean,

14/05/2008 00:28:27
If Wendy goes who could replace her?. If Wendy did not exist we would have to invent her. Her reason for being is to divert attention from Brown's and Darling's fiscal prudence.
10

Marky Bhoy,

Dunfermline 14/05/2008 00:28:55
Like who Dillon Two Little Caterpillers the Marx Brothers and the Flat Earth Society .

Mind you all are more credible than the Labour party
11

,

14/05/2008 00:33:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 14/05/2008 00:35:51
Now, what was all this excretum tauri about calling the SNP's bluff?

The SNP were not bluffing - Wendy was and very shortly Wendy will be a was.
13

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 14/05/2008 00:35:58
This eejit is not just making Labour like a laughing stock, she is now making Scotland a laughing stock.

She has not just undermined Gordon Brown, she has undermined the Scottish Parliament.

She has not only let herself down, she has let down those she represents in the good town of Paisley.

I don't care if there's no-one to take her place. Annabel and Nicol have been a more credible opposition up to now. I'm sure Scottish Labour can take some time out to think about a new leader. It won't affect Parliamentary proceedings.

But she must go NOW.
14

Al Ford,

Insch 14/05/2008 00:45:05
Having now lost count of the number of U-turns that there have been or may have been in Scottish Labour's policy, if it is a policy, on an independence referendum, I can't help thinking that that party has lost a little credibility. I say a little credibility because it seems to me that it was only a little credibility that it had left before this whole fiasco burst upon the scene.

Congratulations to Ms Alexander for completing the transformation of Scottish Labour from a serious political force into a hilarious political farce.

FMQs will be absolutely unmissable this week.
15

I'm Not a Madam, I'm A Concierge!,

Rutherglen 14/05/2008 00:45:55
"Malcolm Chisholm MSP, ..... said: "The SNP have turned down the chance to end the uncertainty facing Scotland and now will be at the mercy of Labour's parliamentary tactics."

TACTICS? TACTICS?? God Almighty!

If these are the same tactics displayed over the past few days then I don't think the SNP have anything to fear.

16

Marky Bhoy,

Dunfermline 14/05/2008 00:49:18
If you met Wendy in the pub how many pints before you would ask her back to your place ( Non political and nothing to do with this thread )

I reckon 15 so Labour should get on the case about binge drinking
17

I'm Not a Madam, I'm A Concierge!,

Rutherglen 14/05/2008 00:51:29
#16 Wardog

Just a minor detail - I thought the idea of Laurel and Hardy was that one of them WASN'T fat?

18

I'm Not a Madam, I'm A Concierge!,

Rutherglen 14/05/2008 00:55:42
#22

But if you DIDN'T pin a tail on it - what would be left showing? Yes, the ar.se - which just about sums up this "cunning plan" from Labour
19

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 14/05/2008 00:59:20
slab internal. Outcome of the inquiry into all the u turns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYBx5_p8r_o
20

Marky Bhoy,

Dunfermline 14/05/2008 00:59:38

Forgive my last comment about Alcoholic consumption and Wendy .

But since the days of John Major has there ever been such a lame duck political leader Gordon Brown excepted of course
21

Jimbo2,

14/05/2008 01:05:41
Unlike the Scotsman, the Herald are banning all comments on Wendy & CO.

The one good thing that has come out of all this is that Wendy and her Labour cohorts in Scotland have managed to get the whole country talking about independence and the referendum.

Now we really do have a national conversation courtesy of the very people who are against it.
22

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 14/05/2008 01:06:05
27-U turn. Here is the real slab story.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYBx5_p8r_o
23

Jimbo2,

14/05/2008 01:15:39
Malcolm Chisholm MSP, said: "The SNP have turned down the chance to end the uncertainty facing Scotland and now will be at the mercy of Labour's parliamentary tactics."

The whole country must have gone into kinks at that statement. Half of the Labour Party probably think a tactic is a small mint.
24

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 14/05/2008 01:27:33
Awe come on Guys and Galls, we cannot afford to have Wendy leave us now, what else are we going to read about?? This whole mess has livened up what is normally a boring subject, but now however the Labour Party,the ones who did not want the Scottish People to have a say in their Constitutionl future, have now set the pace towards INDEPENDENCE. In their own words; BRING IT ON!!!!!!
25

Isonomia,

Lenzie 14/05/2008 01:38:56
It just shows the mainstay contempt for the voter that they simply won't let us vote on separation.

What right have these people to deny the Scottish people a vote ... it is our country not theirs, and I say that as someone who would vote against separation!
26

the_figures_are _fudged,

Galashiels 14/05/2008 01:41:33
Are there any Labour voters left out there ?

If so do you agree with Wendy ?

On what day last week did you agree with her ? Was it before or after she had her daily U turn ?
27

Edward,

14/05/2008 01:46:22
Scottish Labour now back to what there told to do by Gordon Brown and Westminster Labour
In doing so even adopting Brown's characteristic re write of history!
'A senior Westminster source said: "This is a huge relief. We haven't leaned on the MSPs to come to this position, they seem to have come to their senses by themselves' ah right!
If Labour had any decency (which they dont have) they would ALL resign, not just Wendy Alexander
28

,

14/05/2008 01:55:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
29

Guga II,

Rockall 14/05/2008 02:07:18
So, after racing around more U bends than could be found in a badly designed toilet block, the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party (North British Branch) are back where they started.

The Mouth of the South has been brought to heel, and she and her party will, when London shouts sh1t, jump on the shovel. What a pathetic mob they really are.
30

innesm,

Austin, Texas 14/05/2008 03:08:15
Politicians beware of "Bring it on!" bravado. Reference the tragic consequences of George W. Bush's "Bring them on" taunt of Iraqi insurgents. Wendy, know thine enemy before you swagger again on the political stage.
31

williamx,

Delta 14/05/2008 03:48:22
A senior Westminster source said: "This is a huge relief. We haven't leaned on the MSPs to come to this position, they seem to have come to their senses by themselves.

No? I wonder who bought them. I like the Westminster phrase "they seem to have come to their senses by themselves". Sort of a lunatic fringe term applied to the Scottish Labour MPs To bad they don't have the guts to stand up for their own principles. I wonder when asked to "jump" whether they ask how high or merely take off vertically like human jump jets
32

Richardinho,

14/05/2008 05:09:31
someone must have stuck the Labour party in a barrel and told them to stand in the corner!
33

Richardinho,

14/05/2008 05:12:23
Wendy Alexander will have to resign now. Her party has now fatally undermined her authority.
She's really undermined her reputation though for 'intelligence'.
34

scottish person,

Paisley 14/05/2008 05:43:59

He said: "The SNP have turned down the chance to end the uncertainty facing Scotland and now will be at the mercy of Labour's parliamentary tactics."
LOL, Tactics?
This is the woman who helped Terry Kelly,s daughter in to politics. Neither of them can count to ten without stopping. She is an alleged representative of Paisley, she and her party destroyed Paisley, and patted themselves on the back for doing it.
35

Richardinho,

14/05/2008 06:27:34
#37 Good point. The obvious question for a referendum should be one that is as neutral as possible. So do the labour party favour a question that is less than neutral?
36

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 06:53:45
Any day now, Wendy will be on telly letting us know that she has decided to leave her post as the Head Numpty to focus on her family.

Its got nothing to do with her being a halfwit and liar, so dont any of you lot say that. Imagine being married to her and getting dragged into the shops.

Well dear, what exactly is your favourite Armani suit?. Oh you like that one, okay theres the money now go and pay for it. What did you say?. You never said you liked that one?. Fair enough, go and pick another one. "Now are you very sure thats the one you want?" Okay then hen away and pay for it out of the money I gave you. What do you mean I didnt give you the money five minutes ago. What do you mean I owe you the money. What do you mean you only come out to buy milk.

Yes it isnt easy being a Nat and Mr. Wendy.

See ya Wendy, dont let the door hit you in the erky as you go.
37

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 14/05/2008 07:04:39
I fear for Scotland if she is ever by some utter miracle Scotland's FM.

Mind you I would fear for Scotland if Liebour are EVER holding the reins of power again.

We need to be taking charge of our OWN affairs, what's so wrong with that?!
38

Phil1888,

14/05/2008 07:08:43
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/wendy-alexander-goes-to-toilet-by-herself-20080507931/
39

Boy Wonder,

14/05/2008 07:14:48
New Labour appear to have got stuck in a revolving door ... and its Wind-up who's doing the pushing, while the rest are doing the shoving.

One year on ... and they still haven't sorted themselves out! Will they ever??
40

SHANGHAI SCOT,

SHANGHAI 14/05/2008 07:18:34
I have followed this comedy of errors since the anouncement by Wendy last week.

The articles and comments on the blog sites have been really entertaining.

One fustration, I have extreme difficulty in streaming video from the BBC or indeed U Tube sites on the sites referenced by contributers to the threads.

There is no censorship, just the broadband connection apears to be a bit erratic.

Anyone in this neck of the woods having the same difficulty?
41

haggis 10,

The Capital City of Scotland 14/05/2008 07:25:07
The've tried the Wendy Sin drome What next Social Engineering trick have have they up their sleeves I know send in the Black & Tans !!! and Forceably move the foolish Scots to some far off distant land . Then import some cheap labour to colonise North Britain . Problem solved Grateful immigrants vote New labour for another sixty years!!!!
42

,

14/05/2008 07:38:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
43

conservative,

14/05/2008 07:43:20
Birlin' like a peerie. You can only say that Scottish Labour have the leader they so richly deserve. Any bets on how long they will let this foolish woman stay in her position?
44

,

14/05/2008 07:53:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
45

Phil C,

14/05/2008 07:57:01
I don't know how anyone could vote Labour ever again. Labour should in fact be disbanded now, on the grounds of gross misconduct, fraud and negligence.

Where will their votes go? A Tory revival....no chance. A LibDem boost....maybe. An SNP surge....possible, but the Titanic will be refloated first. A Slash n'Sleaze NuNu Labour.....No doubt.

In fact the others haven't a hope with the red rosetted numpty voters of this country. A bunch of people so dense and selfish that they would, even now, still consider imposing their idiotic representatives onto our system of government. It's their right but Jeeeeeeeezz!!
46

,

14/05/2008 08:01:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
47

,

14/05/2008 08:04:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
48

carrottop,

Dumfries 14/05/2008 08:16:41
No one could be that stupid all on her own so she must have the very best of the idiots in her inner cabinet.

Hope the cabinet has a key which can be thrown away after locking.
49

Endangeredscot,

14/05/2008 08:18:06
"This is a much more sensible position than the one held before."

um, which one?
50

Jay Kay,

14/05/2008 08:19:38
After what we have witnessed in this country over the last few years seriously is there anyone out there who would vote for the Nulab administration, honestly unless your utterly dense it aint gona happen, Broon is finished and he can take his Darling with him.

I want a referendum I want Scotland to be a single nation again so we can distance ourselves from the disgrace that is westmonster.

Brown in the past couple of months makes Mugabe look like a flippin Boy Scout, Mr Mugabe you need to take some lessons on how to demoralise your people from Broon.

Wendy hen your doing a great job keep up the good work im sure wee Eck will extend you a lifeline once Scotland becomes independent, oor wee wendy the sleeper mole.
51

Endangeredscot,

14/05/2008 08:19:42
I can't wait for FMQs. I can just imagine Alex standing up with a wee box of mints and saying to Wendy "Did you shake yer tictacs at me?"
52

Scotland to prosper...,

14/05/2008 08:20:35
I don't think I've ever witnessed so much indecision over one topic. How hard can it be to sit down and decide on one strategy? Then again it is Labour I suppose.

It’s a telling indication as to just how well the SNP are doing when Labour get themselves so worked up about a nationalist policy that isn’t due for another two years.

They thought they could go for the jugular but ended up not even able to get the knife out its sheath. As easy as Labour made it for the SNP, Salmond still had to manoeuvre his way through a minefield of possible gaffs, although thanks to Labour sign posting most of them, he had a pretty east time of it.

By sticking to their guns, the SNP have come out of this looking like the mature party. They have a well constructed argument for Independence, allowed a forum for debate and review which allows ALL possibilities (unlike the Calman Commission) and have consistently performed whilst in Government.

Which party would you vote for?

Labour, who tie themselves up in knots over a policy that’s not even their own?

Or the SNP, a party delivering time and time again?
53

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 08:26:54
#37
There is no way on earth that we should use the SNP psyops question. Several of thepeople I have asked assume that if "negociations" do not go well then we would not go forward with independence. How about
Should Scotland become an Indepndent country Yes or No
54

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 08:28:00
Aye a weeks a long time in politics!!!

So here we ur back where we started, except that Nu Labour/Owld torie, still want a referendum, Oh but wait a meenit, in the breath afore that they dinnae want a referendum, and aw that is in there new statement!

"And he (Duncan McNeil, the group chairman) insisted that Labour still supported a referendum on independence, in principle".

Noo whit wan is it Dunkie?, ur ye fur it or agin it, or ur ye a 'Don't Know'?

If ye want the wurdin o' the question go tae yer ain parliament site and look up Annex B in the National coversation bitty.

Onionists, aye nae scruples an nae brains.
55

BIG EYE,

Paisley 14/05/2008 08:29:06
The Grand Old Duke of York today confirmed reports that he "is seriously considering an offer to take over as leader of the Scottish Labour Party in the Scottish Parliament".

He continued "I beleive that my experience of leading my soldiers up and down the hill would be of great benefit to Labour at this time and I note the precision in their abilities to go round and round in circles already. I think we would be a great team"

A senior Labour backbencher said "Bring him on"
56

Linda,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 08:32:53
# 66

Following legal and constitutional advice the referendum question SNP proposes is the best that can be asked under constraints of Scotland Act.

Only Westminster can ask the question you suggesat so why don't Labour bring it on?
57

Calum Crubag,

Dùn Eideann 14/05/2008 08:38:47
Is Wendy the worst Labour leader ever?

Has she actually done anything positive for Scots? Or is it all just dodgy donations, u-turns every day and endless bitter sniping at the SNP? So much for Labour 'listening'...
58

jdships,

14/05/2008 08:42:03
"Malcolm Chisholm MSP, ..... said: "The SNP have turned down the chance to end the uncertainty facing Scotland and now will be at the mercy of Labour's parliamentary tactics."

Tactics ? Labour are now right up there with the Lib Dems in this field.
Devoid of ideas and tactically inept

Wendy Alexander is synonomous with complete humiliation .

For Wendy/New Labour
In the words of the song
" The party's over ,
It's time to call it a day "
Shut the door on the way out - thankyou for nothing.
59

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 08:43:16
#66 All politicians ...
You're right. A question such as 'Do you want Scotland to become an independent state outside the United Kingdom?' [Yes/No] is the only meaningful sort of question.

#69 Linda
You're mistaken. There is nothing to stop the Scottish Parliament holding a CONSULTATIVE referendum on anything using whatever questions it chooses to formulate.

The problem now is as before - getting a majority for a referendum bill at Holyrood. Perhaps Labour at Holyrood should be asked what wording it would support.

60

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 08:44:52
In May last year the Scottish National Party finally broke through the political glass ceiling and, whether or not it ever achieves its ultimate aim, in a short time it has proved that it is more than capable of running the devolved government of Scotland.

The Scots Unionist parties have been picked off one by one and, it would indeed be ironic, if Labour went the same way as the indigenous Tories?

Yesterday, after the Labour Party meeting at Holyrood, embarrassed party officials could not even face the the media to explain Wendy Alexander's shambolic policy on her proposed on/off Referendum?

In Opposition, the Labour Party in Scotland has been exposed as a poorly run political party which has simply taken the Scottish voter for granted, and is urgently in need of radical change before it is too late!
61

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 14/05/2008 08:46:10
So now everyone knows that Labour were never interested in letting the people express their views.Their offer to support a referendum bill was only a cynical tactic to beat back a very popular SNP government.I have been there before so Labours tactics are familiar to me.In the 1970's ,in order to beat back a surge in SNP support,they offered a Scottish Assembly.However,many Labour MP's were oppossed and Labour rigged the vote,did not campaign very much during the referendum and in spite of a narrow yes majority would not implement the bill.Then as now Labour were more concered about themselves,than the poeople.We should not be surprised to see them use tried and trusted tactics in 2008.However,unlike 1978,the tactic failed.What Labour achieved this time was to:

1) Demonstrate that (like 1978) they are divided.This is a problem for them because divided parties always lose.

2) Demonstrate that they cannot be trusted

3)Put themselves into an awkward position.They either deliver their (alleged)committment to let the people express their view in 2010,or pay the price at the next Scottish election.I think that Alec Salmond cannot believe his luck.He has been placed in a win win situation.
62

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 08:47:04
#65 Scotland to Prosper ...

Agree that Scottish Labour look like idiots. Reason obvious: they are behaving like idiots.

But disagree that SNP looks like a mature party. There is nothing mature about calling for a conversation about something when you have already made up your mind. The White paper and the conversation are simply party propaganda at public expense.
63

megz,

glasgow 14/05/2008 08:47:55
Anyone notice that slab are being downgraded? It used to be Scottish Labour now its members of the Scottish Parliament's 'Labour group'. They should call them what they really are, ventriloquist dummy of gordon brown. They can't speak for themselves so there is no chance they can speak for scotland or stand up for scotland.
64

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 08:50:17
#73 Lachie Todd

"In May last year the Scottish National Party finally broke through the political glass ceiling and, whether or not it ever achieves its ultimate aim, in a short time it has proved that it is more than capable of running the devolved government of Scotland."

You're right...BUT any party could do a capable job of run the devolved government if made a reasonable effort. Labour never did. That doesn't prove the need for independence. It just gives the SNP a good claim to be reelected to run the devolved government for another few years.
65

Alastair the First,

14/05/2008 08:50:34
Malcolm Chisholm on Newsnight last night used the phrase "blank cheque" about 60 times in one interview. Obviously Labour like that phrase so much that they have told everyone to keep repeating it. Meanwhile we will achieve independence using a direct online banking transfer, so no need for a cheque, Mr Chisholm.
66

Gruithainn,

Arbroath 14/05/2008 08:53:27
Is there a repository for inept people (Mc Neil,the Twa Alexanders, McConnell & McLeish before them)who wish to represent or even lead Labour in Scotland. A kind of shop perhaps - Eejits-R-Us?
67

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 14/05/2008 08:54:27
#72 "You're right. A question such as 'Do you want Scotland to become an independent state outside the United Kingdom?' [Yes/No] is the only meaningful sort of question."

Except you can't ask that (rather skewed) question because in the event of Scottish independence there would be no United Kingdom for us to be outside of. By definition, if the Union is dissolved then there's no United anything.

The remainder would have to decide what to call itself, but the current title ("United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland") would be void, since "Great Britain" is the name of the physical island on which we live, irrespective of how we choose to divide up the contents.

#75 So once you've chosen your own particular viewpoint on a subject, you've never had a conversation with anyone about it? Your very presence on these boards would seem to dispute that assertion.
68

megz,

glasgow 14/05/2008 08:56:34
#79 yes also listen for harrying, exposing hollowness, tactics (hahahahhahahaha as someone said before members of the Scottish Parliament's 'Labour group' think tactics are little mints)
69

Tory_Boy,

The deep south 14/05/2008 08:56:39
Greetings Dear Friends!

Well all you Jocks and Jockesses up there in the frozen north are really getting the old loin-cloths in a twist over this referendum business eh? But not to fear we Conservatives are coming to the rescue. My good friend Dave assures me that once he assumes the levers of power, he will hold a referendum for you! We will ask all the good people of England if they wish Scotland to remain within the UK and when the resounding NO vote is cast, there you have it you will have your independence! Now there's only one small problem with this and that is that some of my good friends in Edinburgh say that they do not want to be part of an independent Scotland. Again not to fear! We will give the people of Edinburgh their own referendum, and if they wish to join with us we can make a kind of 'Berlin Corridor' up the A1.

Come on now you know it makes sense!
70

DouglasT,

14/05/2008 08:58:17
It says everything about the quality of Labour MSPs that Alexander is still leading the group.
71

Melly,

Sussex 14/05/2008 08:59:19
Aw c`mon folks lay off Wendy she`s only been exploring the options, playing devil`s advocat, a sort of brain storming session really which has yet to reach it`s conclusion !! I vote we keep Wendy, unless slab can find someone else with the same superior intellect- there. Is that possible ?
72

Scotland to prosper...,

14/05/2008 09:01:13
#65 Publius

I fail to see the argument against allowing the public to air their views on an issue.

Yes you may argue a referendum is enough of a platform for the public to express their wish but allowing a fully open debate PRIOR to a referendum allows and much more informed decision at the ballot box.

And indeed the National Conversation and white paper options are far superior to that of the Calman Commission, at least it allows debate on ALL options.

The nationalists HAVE approached this topic in a mature way, they have not gone steaming ahead with a referendum (much to Labours disappointment), they have allowed a period of time to firstly prove themselves in Government and secondly to give the people of Scotland a chance to become informed about Independence.

It is typical of Labour to want the public to decide their fate before allowing any time for debate. The less informed they are, the less likely to vote for change.
73

Truely English,

14/05/2008 09:04:34
Now we know that the Scots do not consider ethnic nationalism to be important and instead talk and discuss Civic Nationalism. Is that because they are English speakers and naturally they are ethnically English.

74

Truely English,

14/05/2008 09:05:58
Will their Ethnicity have any bearing on the Referendum which they hope to have in 2010.

75

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 09:09:36
#82

You are wrong, the precedent was set with Montenegro when both the EU and UN agreed that the rump state left after secession retains the name and all memberships of international organisations whilst the newly independent sate will apply for all memberships and not have the right to use rump state name.
76

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 09:21:18
75 Publius,London 14/05/2008 08:47:04

"But disagree that SNP looks like a mature party. There is nothing mature about calling for a conversation about something when you have already made up your mind. The White paper and the conversation are simply party propaganda at public expense"

But there is an abundance of maturity being demonstrated by the Onionistas forcing through the Scottish Parliament 'A Commission on Devolution, to exclude any talk of Independence',which has been 'hi-jacked' and downgraded to a 'Review' by Westminster, been totally side-swept by Nu Labour/Owld Torie, north and south of the border...er um... and paid for by the Scottish Tax Payer.

When there already is an 'all encompassing conversation' enabled by the legally elected Scottish Government.

Well if that's maturity, then the present Scottish Government must have the stability and wisdom of Solomon, which IMHO they have.
77

roughrider,

Glasgow 14/05/2008 09:23:13
I wish the inglish had the balls to fight for their own parliment. Sadly they havent.
78

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 14/05/2008 09:23:21
I believe that Wendy got it wrong when she claimed that an early referendum would end uncertainty.There is no polling evidence to support the claim that a committment to a referendum in 2010 is troubling many people.On the contary the business community and most of the voters appear to be very relaxed.The only uncertainty is being caused by Labour.The SNP have a manifesto committment to deliver a referendum,but Labour have now u turned on their promise not to obstruct the referendum bill.

I also disagree with that the national conversation is about party propaganda.Having sampled some of it,it is evident that it is balanced and inclusive of all views.It opens up the possibility of other options,such as greater powers.I must say that I find it very refeshing to find politicians who are interested in all views and who are prepared to give me an opportunity to discuss.In the past I have had a series of MP's who were not remotely interested in my view,if it differed from theirs.I think that it is quite correct that the public,especially the indecided are provided with an opportunity to provide the politicians with their views,to ask questions,and to recieve answers.That is democracy,a concept not well understood by some of our previous rulers.
79

AJ Fife,

14/05/2008 09:32:28
Wendy must stay!!!

However, if she gets the size 12 boot right up her, not inconsiderable, bahookie, could we please have the hapless Gray or the 'dull as ditch water' Chisholm as a replacement. Either could fill the position perfectly and they may even add some new forms of incompetence to the Labour leadership!

The dream would be Foulkes! Even the Labour Party aren't that daft, are they???
80

Mrs Miggins,

14/05/2008 09:37:13
SNP landslide at the next election.

Hurrah for the white cockade!!!
81

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 09:37:29
90 All Politicians are the same,Scotland 14/05/2008 09:09:36

I think you are wrong on that one The State Union of Serbia and Montenegro existed between 2003 and 2006, and ceased to exist after Montenegro declared Independence in 3rd June 2006, it's (Montenegro's) currency before UDI was the Euro, as it still is.

The 'Rump state' Serbia, declared their Independence also in 5th June 2006.

So no 'Rump State' left only two new republics, and a UN administered area (Kosovo, which UDI'd this year, 2008).

82

Iain's,

14/05/2008 09:40:30
The danger of an independent Scotland is that the New Labour party turn the country into Europe's Myanmar /Burma. A self seeking corrupt snake pit.
83

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 09:45:10
97 Iain's,14/05/2008 09:40:30

That's taking Onionist 'Scaremongering' to the Nth.

"Hey guys don't vote for Independence, as you'll end up with a Nu Labour/Owld Torie dic tatorship."

That's why we want Independence, we already have that, and we're pucked off with it!!!
84

Arfur,

14/05/2008 09:51:57
"Malcolm Chisholm MSP, ..... said: "The SNP have turned down the chance to end the uncertainty facing Scotland and now will be at the mercy of Labour's parliamentary tactics." - I nearly fell of my chair laughing when I seen this.

Wendy the halfwit must stay.
85

Miss H,

14/05/2008 09:55:59
75 That is a mad comment. It really is. Do you seriously believe that the Scottish people have made up their minds about independence, enhanced devolution and all the other options? My God we don't even know what enhanced devolution MEANS at this stage so how can people make a judgement?

Or are you simply talking about the position taken by political parties? Because if so your remarks are meaningless. Positions change, as we have seen over the past few weeks!

In any case the whole entire point of the national conversation is to ensure that the decision is in the hands of the electors, not decided in stitched up deals by politicians behind closed doors.
86

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 09:56:14
#96

"Serbia will inherit the union's seat at the United Nations and in other international institutions.

Montenegro will have to apply for membership in international organisations once it has been granted recognition by other states"

From the BBC 22/05/2006.

87

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 10:18:54
The only way she can survive in any form as a politician is not only to resign as leader of the Labour group of MSPs but also from the Labour Party.

If she sat as an independent she'd probably be a damn sight more effective that the 45 other turkeys who just voted for Christmas. I say 45 - we don't know if any MSPs actually backed her - if there is a serious split amongst Labour MSPs this could run and run.
88

Farmernot,

14/05/2008 10:19:06
OUpon her resignation will she have to hand back the " Leadership Election Expenses" she so wrongfully claimed ????????.............I'm not holding my breath.
She is as unaelectable as a hungry caterpillar now......bye bye soor pus
89

Conan the Librarian™,

14/05/2008 10:20:42
He He.The "tactics" of the Light Brigade at Balaclava...and the Thin Red Line is suffering from Anorexia nervosa;-)
90

pehman,

sussex 14/05/2008 10:23:45
When the blab spokesman says "we didn't make them" read we just said we'd hold back any payments to slab, just as we're doing to Holyrood
91

Alan B,

14/05/2008 10:25:14
The article seems misleading. They say labour are back in the position pre-wendies call for a referndum, but also says they back a referendum in principle.

Malcolm Chisholm on Newsnight, was bit of a joke. And made it very unclear what labours position actually was. Repeating a "no blank cheque" mantra, but refusing to say whether they would vote against the referendum.

It just seems like labour have decided to fudge the issue rather than clear it up.
92

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 10:30:02
Caption for the photo:

Maybe if a shut my eyes, think REALLY hard and click my heels together, I'll get home and out of this mess.

Any more?
93

Aesop,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 10:31:06
When you leave aside the party politicking, and laughter at New labour in disarray, it's clear that the unionists - media and politicans alike - hit the panic button when they realised the consequences of Wendy Alexander's initial announcement.

It's all very well poo-pooing a referendum, claiming that Scots will vote against independence, but in their hearts the unionists realise that Scots may very well vote to stand on our own two feet and cut the apron strings that tie us to the British nanny state.

Hence the unionist backlash against Ms Alexander, complete with obligatory character assassinations about being "Mad Wendy" etc. Very predictable. Seen it all before.

Sadly for the unionists it'll take more than character assassination of WA to defeat the SNP's Referendum Bill of 2010. Once lame duck PM Brown is offed next year by the Cameronians it's game on for Independence.

As the beneiftis of a living in a progressive non-xenophobic Scotland is dragged backwards by Tory rule from London I doubt if a single MSP at Holywood will defy the national majority calling for an independence referendum in 2010.

Bring it on, indeed. Saor Alba.
94

Dooogie,

Highland 14/05/2008 10:31:31
Does anyone remember the labour claim that everyone would be £4,000 worse off if they voted in an SNP government? The sky has'nt fallen in on us and the sun still rises and sets as before, Marvelous is'nt it!
95

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 10:34:51
#108:

"...cut the apron strings that tie us to the British nanny state."

That would make no difference at all. Scotland has her OWN nanny state, and nazi state.

I am fairly certain that nothing significant would change for the man in the street should we get independence.
96

Ananurhing,

14/05/2008 10:48:49
To use Wardog's Laurel and Hardy analogy, Labour's shenanigans this past week have been like watching the comic duo trying to shift a piano.

Labour have become the 'jam car' of Scottish politics. They're simply in the way of progress.
So Wendy had the full support of Brown, and Labour MSPs? Aye right. Notice how comfortable they all are with insulting us like this.
Wendy's U turn after U turn whilst her star is descending. AKA locked in a downward spiral.
FMQs this week is going to be a turkey shoot. I hope Salmond lets loose on her.

Scottish Labour are treating us with the same contempt that they always have. They no longer even try to hide the fact that they're Scottish compradors, pursuing a westminster agenda.
97

John S,

14/05/2008 10:50:23
#109 Dooogie : Now they can be confident that any referendum on independence would be lost. So today in Glasgow Mr Blair and Mr Brown will warn that the SNP's promises, even without independence, will cost Scottish families £5,000 a year. April 3, 2007 The Guardian
Prime Minister Tony Blair today attacked the “substantial risk” to Scotland's economy posed by the SNP's “uncosted spending commitments and sums that do not add up”.
Jack McConnell, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, meeting in Glasgow, said that voting for the SNP on May 3 would cost Scottish families £5,000 more than staying with Labour.Holyrood - 03 April 2007
Labour's Margaret Curran added: "It's time the SNP was honest with families across Scotland. The Nationalists would cost Scottish families over £5,000 with their high tax plans. SoS - 8 Apr 2007

Nuff Said !!!
98

Alan B,

14/05/2008 10:51:07
#110 Alternative

The problem with that arguement is governments do actually matter. Different governments meant britain was different place in 60s compared to the 70s to the 80s to the 90s etc.

If u compare different countries, they are different becuase government take different decisions. The people of these countries see things differently.

Decision by the sp have made a difference. Whether u personally agree with them is a different matter. Smoking ban, free personal care.

Teh advantage of independence from a democratic point of view would mean the government would be closer to the people it leads and more in tune with their wishes. U would no longer have a situation where the government of the uk could be completely rejected by the scottish people ie the 17yrs of tory rule. U would not longer have a political party like labour selling out all it holds dear to be seen to be electable in england, despite being popular in scotland.

If an independent scotland could transform our economy to match the other small european countries so many of our graduates and others would not have to go to london for a job.
99

Ananurhing,

14/05/2008 10:53:50
107# Alternative Fuel Head

" I do believe in faeries,....I do I do I do!"
100

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 11:00:43
101 All Politicians are the same,Scotland 14/05/2008 09:56:14

"Under the constitutional charter of the union, Serbia now inherits membership of the United Nations and other international institutions, leaving Montenegro to apply in its own right."

That 'constitutional charter' referred to is the 'charter of Union' setting up the 'State Union of Serbia and Montenegro', NOT I repeat NOT the UN charter.

So you are still wrong.

Scotland and England have no 'Constitutional Charter' and it is doubtful if the 'Treaty of Union' is registered with the appropriate authorities, Viz-a-viz the UN or it's predecessor the League of Nations, so using your rationale, both Scotland and the 'Rump State' remaining would have to apply for EU membership, UN membership, and await 'International recognition'.

101

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 11:05:36
110 Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,Edinburgh 14/05/2008 10:34:51

You've lost your argument before you start.

two words 'Godwin's Law'
102

Rasco,

Inverness 14/05/2008 11:12:19
Just seen Newsnight could not believe Chisholm never a straight answer only 7 no blank cheques for SNP this seems to be the stock answer now from them all.
103

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 11:14:30
#115

It sets a precedent in the modern world which is basis of law.
104

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:15:53
115 Boggle
Pehaps so - but just because the rest of the uk might also have to go through all the negotiations is'nt going to make the process any easier.
105

Scotsman in Dublin,

14/05/2008 11:22:42
You couldn't make this stuff up. Labour are in disarray not because their members are incompetent but because their whole argument is incompetent. Labour are finding out that you cannot serve two masters. Labour (and Lib and Tory) cannot appropriately serve the Scottish people because they must always dance to Westminster's tune. This is why the SNP are so successful, because they are the only electable party that will put Scotland first.
106

Edward,

14/05/2008 11:24:21
Listened online to Malcolm 'no blank cheques' Chisholm, being interviewed by Glen Campbell (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7399011.stm)
At one point Glen had to remind Mr No Blank Cheques, that the wording was already available as it was on the white paper published last year. But Chisholms continued to trot out 'no blank cheques' like some demented idiot. Obviosuly Chisholm had been breifed to the point of torture that he must keep repeating 'no blank cheques' as much as possible
107

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:27:07
121. Since when were Labour so fussy about cheques?
108

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:27:26
115/118
There is an aspect to all of this which I feel few have considered. There appears to be an assumption among nationalists that Scotland would get sympathetic treatment in negotiating the terms of its EU membership.

However political reality and any knowledge of European History would indicate that this is a very dangerous assumption. Many European countries (Italy, Germany, Spain, Greece, France etc. have within them constuent elements which used to be separate states. There are varying levels of nationalist movements with these states but the governments of unionised countries would not wish to see their power eroded by these nationalist movements being encouraged. They may well feel that granting Scotland favourable terms in EU membership would do just that. They may well, therefore, make the negotiations for membership rather difficult for Scotland.
109

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:28:25
118. What international organisation do you think would resist Scottish membership and why?

And given 80 countries have become independent in the last few decades and all joined the UN or EU or Nato, why are these not precedents?
110

Edward,

14/05/2008 11:30:33
I find the Labour party is a complete and utter joke!
how on earth anyone can vote for them is beyond me and Im speaking as a former Labour activist and supporter!
111

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:30:59
123. Can you explain why a Labour UK Foreign Secretary said "the EU would welcome Scotland with open arms".

Are you saying that France, Spain, Germany are all so undemocratic that would seek to obstruct a democratic choice by Scots?

And in actual fact, the legal precedents and international law point to continued Scottish membership of the EU in case of independence- any negotiations would take place on that basis.
112

thistle do,

here n' there 14/05/2008 11:31:30
#121 I agree, the sad thing is that Malcolm was (is?) a man of conviction and integrity who always spoke his mind. It's as though he is now blinded by the ars.eholes around him. When someone like him is drawn into the mess, there's no tomorrow.
113

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 11:33:50
#124

I think no organisations would resist Scottish membership, all I am saying is that the UK would continue as England/NI and wales and retain all current memberships including a permament place on the UN security council.
114

thistle do,

here n' there 14/05/2008 11:35:18
#125 I'm the same a you Edward. This mess whether it be in London or Holyrood was not what I was brought up to expect from Labour.
115

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:36:31
123. Perhaps you could also explain why France, Spain, Germany etc all recognised the seccession of the Slovak republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Kosovo, East Timor etc etc - but would uniquely have a problem with Scotland? What has Scotland done to offend?
116

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:40:16
128. Yes, the UK would retain EU and UN membership. Its place as permanent SC member, and France's, is probably questionable in the longer term.

And indeed, Scotland would retain EU membership.
117

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:42:15
130 Ayrshire Scot
You are not comparing like with like. The countries you mentioned did not separate while being members of the EU. I am not saying that these countries would not recognise Scotland - they inevitably would. I am saying that, to protect their own interests, they make the negotiations difficult.
118

ruthie,

lothians 14/05/2008 11:42:59
hehee labour is in a mess...it's so entertaining you couldnae make it up! Great photo by the way mr MacLeod! sums Ms Alexander up perfectly!! We're SICK of Labour, we're SICK of subsidising London. It's time for Wendy to step down.
119

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:43:22
131. As Scotland would continue in membership, and there is no mechanism for expulsion, your theory of larger countries imposing a punitive settlement is far fetched. If these countries were so worried, in the undemocratic fashion that you assert not to "endorse" seccession, then why did they all endorse Latvia, Lithuania, Slovak and Czech republics, East Timor etc.

I think most Europeans would accept a democratic vote for self determination, as they are democrats.
120

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:45:23
133. Difficult in what way? Scotland would probably want to join the Euro.
121

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:46:31
126 Ayrshire Scot
Is this a direct quote from David Milliband?
122

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:47:43
137. Robin Cook.
123

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:50:24
133. U

so are you saying France, Germany, Spain all respect democracy and self-determination in non EU states, but not or less in EU states? What a bizarre opinion you have of the regard for basic democractic pronciples.

France, Spain, Germany etc all endorsed Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, the Czeck and Slovaks accession to the EU, after seccession, without any punitive terms - if your argument about France, Germany etc held any water this would not have been the case.
124

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:52:29
137 UG

Robin Cook, when Foreign Secretary, said

"It's in the nature of the European Union, it welcomes all comers and Scotland would be a member'.

"When we have recently welcomed Romania and Bulgaria into full EU membership, how could it be otherwise for resource-rich Scotland?"
125

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 11:56:00
140. From the few polls on Scottish attitude to the Euro, c. 50% are in favour if conditions right, 20% "never", and 90% think it will happen in near future.

126

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 11:57:03
135 Ayrshire Scot
You are not addressing the point I made. I am not saying that the EU countries would not recognise self-determination - they would. They would not think of all of this as punishing Scotland but may well try to protect their own interests as far as they can. They might well accept Scotland as an EU member but, as I stated, they may make the process difficult and the terms of Scotland's membership might not be very favourable. As has been stated there are no rules for this process.
127

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 12:00:15
143. Scotland would continue as a member state from independence - it would not be applying for membership.

As Scotland is currently having its number of Euro MPs cut, again, to 6, and has currently zero votes in the council, no commissioner, and no voice, where as when independent will have more Euro MPs, a seat and votes on the council etc our position will be immediately improved.

As for negotiations, what specific terms do you think could be made "difficult"?
128

Arran of Arran,

The Isle of Arran, of course 14/05/2008 12:01:28
If Scotland becomes an independent Republic in a democratic process (which I personally would be very happy for) it would be far wiser for Scotland

NOT to join the EU for at least the first 20 years.

The EU is made uniquely for the large states and is not very helpful for the small states. Look at Europe: Island, Norway, Switzerland, Lichtenstein as well as Andorra, San Marino and Monaco are not members in the EU and they are in all league tables at the very top, be that education (PISA), common wealth, low taxation, effective environmental protection, etc. Contrary, they are on the bottom in the negative tables like crime, corruption, misgovernment, health, etc. Scotland has the right size to join the efforts of those countries to maintain their independence, but to negotiate treaties with the EU, accepting some of the EU rules which are in favour of both parties and the EU being happy with some of the specific ways these countries run themselves.
129

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:05:15
141 Ayrshire Scot
As I said before you are not comparing like with like. These counties broke away and THEN entered the EU. This is a different situation from a country leaving an EU state and then wishing to negotiate its terms of membershp. This is not, as you keep stating, a matter of recognising democratic expression - that is not the issue as it will be recognised. It is a matter of how some EU members will react in a situation they have never faced before.
130

Alan B,

14/05/2008 12:08:29
#Ugly George

Greenland had to negotiate to leave the EU.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_withdrawal

131

Alan B,

14/05/2008 12:10:03
#147 should have added when greenland split from denmark.
132

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:10:19
144 Ayrshire
What could be made difficult - the big one is the EU contribution. Maggie Thatcher negotiated a partial rebate on the UK contribution in 1984. Many EU countries are still unhappy about this. They may well insist that in the circumstances Scotland and the remainder of the UK pay this back between them.

Also look at fishing - there is already discontent at EU fishing policy as it effects Scotland.
133

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:13:25
147 Alan B
Yes it did - but this is exactly the point. Whether a country leaves or stays as a new member, negotiations have to take place. It is not an automatic process of just continuing as you were.
134

Arran of Arran,

14/05/2008 12:16:58
The argument about the other large states who have a separatist movement is rather negclectable:

Spain, yes they have a problem with the Basque People, but there these problems are unresolvable because of the now over 50 years of terror on both sides.

Portugal has a little separatist movement in the Azores, but it is not very vigourous. However, if Scotland wins independence in a democratic way, the Azoreans might want to have the same rights.

Italy has no remarkable separatist movements.

France has on in Corsica, but with a wise governement, giving them a large autonomy, they have got the people quitet and only a handful of hardy terrorists still belive in a true indepenence.

Germany has nothing of a break-off of Bundesländer in the offing. This is mainly due to the fact, that Germany is not a National state, but a federal state of about 15 independent Länder who have far reaching power of governing. The German State deals mainly with international relations, defence, monetary matters, higher education, national transport (roads, trains), economic development (similar to Switzerland).

I do not think, that with this scenario the EU would make much difficulties for Scotland to become a member state if we really would like to. I think they would be much more concerned, if Scotland would join a loose association with Island, Norway and Switzerland.
135

Alan B,

14/05/2008 12:21:25
#Ugly George

U are right that they are issues that need to be dealt with but that should not stop scotland moving to independence if it is the right thing to do.

As far as i am concerned the arguments for independence are pretty overwhelming.

This can be from a political point of view ie the parties elected to manage scotland are more likely to be intune with the desires of the scottish people that what we have seen from westminster. eg 17yrs of tory rule despite being completely rejected at the ballot box in scotland. Also labour a popular party in scotland reforming itself to get english popularity throwing away much of what its stood for and made it popular in scotland in the process.

And also from an economic point of view. Cannot be bother going into how much better the other small western euopean countries have done.

Scotland would be welcomed into the eu as an individual member but would have to deal with tricky negotations. ie how does it rectify the problems with fishing where westminster sold us down the river etc.

Yes some countries may fear break aways like spain, but countries like germany and france would probably welcome a weakening of england. Scotland is much more likely to fit into the social democratic model of the eu.
136

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 12:21:33
149. UG

the UK government own papers during EU membership negotiation said that the UK would sacrifice fishing and that fishermen were "expendable" - in effect the UK chose deliberately to damage a vital industry in Scotland (as Scotland had 65% of the UK industry) to further its EU membership. Fishing is a prime example of how being part of the UK has not been good for Scottish interests.

The CFP has indeed been bad for Scotland - it is one area Scotland would seek changes. Only membership of the EU will give Scotland a voice on this.

The EU cannot change previous budgets so the point about demanding the rebate back for periods 80-90 is just silly, and future contributions would be calculated on the same basis as they are calculated for all other countries at present for forth coming budgets.
137

kimba,

14/05/2008 12:22:45
151. Switzerland is not an island,think you mean Sweden!
138

Alan B,

14/05/2008 12:23:05
#150 Ugly George

Agreed.

But it does show that we would not be out in the cold having to wait for yrs to be able to join like many unionist say.
139

 Ayrshire Scot™,

14/05/2008 12:25:54
150. UG

on Greenland the precedent is one oc continued membership. Greenland wanted to leave the EU, on achieving dominion status it was ruled under international law to be a continuing member of the EU and had to negotiate its way out. Similarly, Scotland would be in continued membership and would negotiate as a member not an applicant.
140

Alan B,

14/05/2008 12:29:41
#kimba "Switzerland is not an island,think you mean Sweden!"

What is the weather like in planet kimba. Sweden is a member of the eu. The poster was referring to non eu members.


see "if Scotland would join a loose association with Island, Norway and Switzerland."

just cannot spell Iceland :)
141

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:32:06
153 Ayrshire Scot
Sorry I should have been clearer - I didn't mean that the previous years of the rebate would have to be repaid - I meant that it would no longer apply in the future.The Eu may well insist on this and say that Scotland and the rest of the UK will no longer benefit from this in the future.

As far as fishing is concerned - would Scotland be in a strong bargaining position to extract concessions? What leverage would it have in the negotiations?
142

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:37:53
155 Alan B
Not out in the cold perhaps but in someting of a state of limbo until all the negotiations had been concluded with the EU and UK are completed. How long this would take is anybody's guess but I can't see the mechanisms of bureaucracy moving rapidly on this.

Meanwhile is this scenario going to be particularly good for investment?
143

Alan B,

14/05/2008 12:38:28
#Ugly George

"As far as fishing is concerned - would Scotland be in a strong bargaining position to extract concessions? What leverage would it have in the negotiations?"

It is alway difficult to rectify something that has been negotiated away. Why does spain get such a better fishing deal? What leverage did thay have?
144

gus1940,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:38:42
Does anybody know what odds the bookies are giving on Miss 10 out of 10 being the next First Minister?
145

kimba,

14/05/2008 12:38:46
157,Whatever,just pointing out that "switzerland" is not an island!
146

Calum Crubag,

14/05/2008 12:38:52
Malcolm Chisholm and the Blank Cheques. Catchy band name.

That's Labour though... full of blanks.
147

gus1940,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:38:57
Does anybody know what odds the bookies are giving on Miss 10 out of 10 being the next First Minister?
148

gus1940,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:38:59
Does anybody know what odds the bookies are giving on Miss 10 out of 10 being the next First Minister?
149

Alan B,

14/05/2008 12:43:48
#158 Ugly George

With regard to the uk rebate. The rebate is due to the uk and france paying roughly the same in but france getting alot more back in return via cap.

To see scotland position i would imagine u would have to look at Denmark, Ireland and Belgium to get an idea what our gross contribution would be. How much u get back can depend on things like agriculture policy?

What do u think the gross and net contributions would be for an indpendent scotland in the eu by comparing ourselves to other small countries and how would this compare to our current position?
150

Arran of Arran,

14/05/2008 12:46:49
Switzerland is well and truly an "island": the rock inside a very volatile EU-sea of waste, rubbish, corruption and havoc.

151

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 12:47:58
160 Alan B
To be honest - I don't know but the essential point I am trying to make is that many (if not all) EU negotiations are plagued by self-interest. Scotland may feel that it would have a strong bargaining position but, as one small member of a club that would consist of 28 members, which may well be perceived by some countries as "rocking the boat" things could get difficult.
152

Arran of Arran,

14/05/2008 12:49:46
Switzerland is well and truly an "island": the rock inside a very volatile EU-sea of waste, rubbish, corruption and havoc.

Otherwise, you are right. Neither is Norway, Andorra, Lichtenstein, Scotland, Monaco, San Marino. Only Iceland.
153

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 14/05/2008 12:51:41
#90 "You are wrong, the precedent was set with Montenegro when both the EU and UN agreed that the rump state left after secession retains the name"

Totally different situation. You can call a country anything you want, and parts of the former Yugoslavia have been through about half-a-dozen names in the last 50 years. It's just a chunk of a much larger piece of land. But "Great Britain" is an island, and it has a name that's totally separate from any political issues. The rump UK would no longer be a United Kingdom Of Great Britain and anywhere, because a third of the landmass of Great Britain would not be part of it.

Seats at the UN and so on are another entirely separate issue. The point is, an independent Scotland would NOT be "outside the United Kingdom", because the United Kingdom would be United no more, and as such would need a different name. It MIGHT change that name to, say, "The United Kingdom Of England, Wales and Northern Ireland", but that wouldn't happen until AFTER a pro-independence vote, so clearly you couldn't use the name on the ballot paper.
154

Alan B,

14/05/2008 13:43:38
#Ugly George

"Meanwhile is this scenario going to be particularly good for investment?"

I think that depends on a few things. As scotland would be continuing with eu membership but just negotating things like contributions. (do not know if they could open up fishing discussions) i cannot see it having an adverse effect on investment in itself.

But that really depends how well managed things are and there is commitment from scotland to remain a member. If there are serious question about leaving then there will be an effect.

Question about the effect on investment i think will have more to do with.
1)splitting from england
2)are we going to join the euro - will that be have a positive effect on investment?
3)the government at the time and their policies. For instance an snp government that introduces a 20% corporation tax will be seen as positive. the snp government at the moment have been getting brownie points from the business community so far with cuts in business rates.
155

Edward,

14/05/2008 13:59:30
#131 sm753
Your quite ill informed
If Scotland became independent, there would be NO United Kingdom to leave
Thats a fact.
in 1707 the treaty was for a political union of the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England, the nae of this union was the United Kingdom of Great Britain. The dissalution of the union will mean going back to the seperate identities of the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England
Wales is not a kingdom , its a princepality of England. Likewise Northern Ireland is also not a Kingdom, but a province of the United Kingdom
so post independence we will have the Kingodm of England, the Kingdom of Scotland and a province, which has to decide what it needs to do!
So please dont keep thinking there will still be a 'United Kingdom' as simply there wont be!
Also the Union flag will be consigned to the dusbin of history
The only common feature of England and Scotland will be the monarch, who will remain the monarch of both countries as the 1603 union of crowns would not be effected
156

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 14:00:23
#100 Miss H

Your comments on the White Paper are either naive or deliberately misleading.

(1) The authors of the White Paper - the leadership of the SNP - want independence and nothing but independence. That's the whole point of the SNP: it exists for no other purpose. So there is no point in having a 'conversation' with them about any other constitutional arrangements.

(2) The purpose of the White Paper is to allow the SNP to engage in party propaganda at public expense for a few years. Hitherto White Papers have been -used simply to indicate draft legislation that would be introduced into parliament after a very short time and to allow interested parties to comment on it.

157

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 14:02:39
#87 Scotland to Prosper...

Your post is load of twaddle. The White Paper doesn't offer options. It proposes a bill for independence. It doesbn't propose bills for anything else.
158

Edward,

14/05/2008 14:04:47
#151
The azores actually enjoy a greater deal of atonomy that Scotland could ever dream of!
As for the arguements by others that Scotland would receieve a 'hard time', I have to say that this is completely ill founded as Scotland does, despite all efforts by Westminster, enjoy a fairly good relationship with other European countries and is very well liked by other European countries, so by no stretch of the imagination would Scotland run into difficulties over membership. I would say the opposite would be true in that EU member states would be lining up to get Scotland on board
159

John S,

14/05/2008 14:07:39
Eamonn Gallagher, former Director-General of the European Commission, who has stated that "it's inconceivable the EU wouldn't welcome an independent Scotland with open arms".

Independence would leave Scotland and something called the rest' in the same legal boat. If Scotland had to re-apply, so would the rest. I am puzzled at the suggestion that there would be a difference in the status of Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom in terms of community law if the Act of Union was dissolved."
Those were the words of the late Lord MacKenzie-Stuart, a former president of the European Court of Justice.

Scotland and the remainder of the UK would be equally entitled, and obliged, to continue the existing full membership of the EU. This was conceded by Emile Noel, one of Europe's founding fathers and long-serving secretary-general of the European Commission, who said Scottish independence would create two states, which would have "equal status with each other and the other states".
160

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 14:08:13
#91 Boggle fey the Bog

"forcing through the Scottish Parliament 'A Commission on Devolution, to exclude any talk of Independence'"

"There already is an 'all encompassing conversation' enabled by the legally elected Scottish Government."

You're wrong on both counts.
(1) The Calman Commission was not forced through the Scottish Paliament. It was approved by a majority.

(2) There isn't an all encompassing conversation. The White paper is propaganda at public expense by the government of the day, which has long ago made up its mind on the question of independence. And the White Paper wasn't even introduced in parliament, let alone approved by a majority.
161

Edward,

14/05/2008 14:08:19
#174 Publius,London
Actually the white paper does present three options, of status quo, more powers as well as Indpendence and with th indpendence part, sets out what th question would be in the proposed referendum
You really should read it , instead of spouting on ill founded ill informed arguement, a bit like Labour actually
162

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 14:10:34
#93 Suomi

You write "There is no polling evidence to support the claim that a committment to a referendum in 2010 is troubling many people.On the contary the business community and most of the voters appear to be very relaxed"

On the contrary quite a lot of the business community want this matter resolved p.d.q. - Tom Hunter for one.
163

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 14:14:24
#178 Edward
I have had a copy of the White Paper since the day of publication. It is on my desk now. It is much read and much thumbed. The White Paper simply sets up other options as straw men in order to reject them and then gives the draft of the government's bill. And the government has no intention whatsoever of changing its mind on independence.
164

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 14:14:41
Boggle (115): "Scotland and England have no 'Constitutional Charter' and it is doubtful if the 'Treaty of Union' is registered with the appropriate authorities, Viz-a-viz the UN or it's predecessor the League of Nations"

This seems to be a red herring: Britain was, of course, a founder senior member of the League and the UN, implicitly accepting the validity of its constitution. Recall also that Russia inherited the USSR's UN rights and duties without further ado, despite far greater changes than would occur with the secession of Scotland.
165

Alan B,

14/05/2008 14:16:54
#Publius

While i do not doubt the snp want independence. No parties are putting all the options on the table for discussion. A national conversation could have done that but would need everyone to participate.

What are the options?
1)Direct westminster rule. do that been there, moved on after 97.
2)status quo - option polls say substantial majority want more powers.
3)federalism
4)con federalism - independent but a member of uk union like members are to eu. (an option that interests me)
5)abit more powers. what? bit fluffy and undefined. Lib dems through steel were the only unnionist party to actually try to put forward a position.

With 3 and 5 above what are the options for fiscal policy.
a)fiscal autonomy
b)fiscal federalism
c)continue with barnett
d)abit of fiscal responsibility (again fluffy and not clear - defined by no-one)

6)independence
- here we have options of eu membership and currency options. And options over how to manage defence eg Nato or not.

The fact is no-one is putting these option together and letting anyone choose from the alternatives. In many ways it is for the unionist to put clear alternatives within the union. That could have been presented to the national converation with the idea that the outcome be put to a referendum.

Part of the problem is that the unionist parties do not want scotland to choose what type of uk that they want or until wendy whether they even want to be within the uk.
166

RSBuff,

Gawd's Country 14/05/2008 14:17:07
Wendy looks as though she is beginning a seizure or is getting prepared to expound the "F-word."
167

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 14:17:27
Edward (172): "If Scotland became independent, there would be NO United Kingdom to leave Thats a fact."

This is not so, despite the historical origin of its name. The legal and political identity of the UK would almost certainly be vested in England, as the successor state, comprising some 90% of the population and GDP: international law is necessarily pragmatic.
168

Paula,

14/05/2008 14:18:04
Anyone now who still fancies putting x in the box next to a Labour candidate in the next vote must feel like a right diddy.

Of course we could wait for Wendy's equally competent brother to make that as complicated as possible.
169

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 14:21:08
#172

Really, so when Westminster continues to use the name and given the "precedent" of Montenegro who is going to say no. We will have Scotland "seperate" from the United Kingdom which will comprise of England Wales and Northern Ireland. I beleive the EU will have no problems with an independent scotland joining. Your inference in #175 that everyone in the EU loves Scotlasnd despite Westminster is the sort of racist overtones which will help the undecided vote for the status quo.
170

Arfur,

14/05/2008 14:24:24
caption time for bendy's photo, i think she is saying -

Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes
(Turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-Changes
Don't want to be a richer man
Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes
(Turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-Changes
Just gonna have to be a different man
Time may change me
But I can't trace time
171

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 14:24:41
John S (176): "Independence would leave Scotland and something called the rest' in the same legal boat. If Scotland had to re-apply, so would the rest."

As I observed above, Russia was accepted as the successor state of the USSR without further ado, inheriting the USSR's rights and obligations under international law, including the Security Council seat. Your argument would seem to imply that this was legally incorrect, and that the republics of the former USSR would all be in the same legal boat -- and yet it was not so. International law is necessarily pragmatic: it cannot be bound by idealistic or diplomatic statements, such as those you quote, for long before reality intervenes.

More interestingly, why is this so important to Scotland?
172

Ugly George,

Ediburgh 14/05/2008 14:25:19
171 Alan B
I agree with you about 1 and 2 - if there is doubt about whether and when Scotland would join the Euro there will be speculation as to the rate at which it would join and speculation of the effect of the stability pact etc. If this lingers, it is likely to create uncertainty which cannot be good for investment.

As far as the position on govt. policies such as corporation tax go it is worth noting that countries all over Europe are lowering this and the Tories have a the same policy. Even if Labour stay in power after the next gen. election they would probably be forced to lower the rate as France and Germany are doing so. A 20% rate of corporation tax is likely to be the norm in a few years. The days when Ireland managed to sneak an advantage with this policy are gone. The room for manouevre on items such as this is now far more limited.
Also the Scottish govt. would have to conduct the negotiations from the outset before it had the opportunity to introduce new measures. It may state that it wishes to undertake certain measures but there may be a degree of scepticism as to whether they can be implemented. Analysts may respond "yes you say that you want to lower taxation but can you do this and maintain traditionally high levels of public spending if North Sea oil production is declining."
There are so many uncertainties and areas of concern.
173

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 14:25:26
#151 Isle of Arran

Personally I think this discussion about Scotland and the EU or UN other international orgnisation is like discussing how many angels can dance on a pinhead. Nobody can really know.

But EU states do take different views on secessions. Most EU states led by Germany, France and UK have recognised Kosovo (now Kosova because the Kosovans prefer it that way) as an independent state, but Spain and Cyprus have not. And they would certainly veto any application by Kosovo/a to join the EU. Both Spain and Cyprus are concerned that recognition by the EU as a whole may help to legitimate secessionist movements - Catalonia, North Cyprus.
174

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 14:30:21
#182 Alan B

There is only one first order choice - independence or not.
What form of government is best for Scotland within the UK is a second order choice, which Calman may help to clarify.

To conflate the two muddies the water.

175

Alex X,

14/05/2008 14:30:49
Oh the original quote has been removed and I hear that the poster has been banned. Och weel it is worth quoting again.


"Our long term objective is a lower starting rate of income tax of ten pence in the pound."

-Labour 1997 election manifesto
176

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 14:31:37
175 Edward
It is not a matter of how well liked you are - that is not going to make one tiny bit of difference. It is amatter of political reality and expediency. As I stated, if some EU countries feel that Scotland is "rocking the boat" and encouraging nationalist movements in their own countries they may not be happy.
177

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 14:31:45
All Politicians are the Same (186): "I beleive the EU will have no problems with an independent scotland joining."

There would be no legal problems, since Scotland has already implemented EU law. However, predicting EU reaction is difficult, as is predicting England's reaction. It might be that England and Scotland will proclaim their mutual friendship, joining the EU as joyful member states. Alternatively, a bitter England might use all influence to block Scotland's membership. Here France is crucial, not least since it possesses its own potential separatists.
178

Alan B,

14/05/2008 14:36:22
#189 Ugly George

What i was meaning was if the government get the confidence of business then investment will continue. A government talking or even implementing policies like a 20% corportation tax will inspire confidence where as a government talking like a 1970s labour politician will not.

I would like to see an assessment of the impact the euro would have on the scottish economy. Would it mean more investment from global corporations with aspriration on the eu single market. Would it mean uk companies wanting to be within the euro locates stuff to scotland. What would the effect on growth be of the lower interest rates. While the above are obvious the positives what would the negatives be. Could companies participating in the uk market only move to england?

179

The Master,

14/05/2008 14:36:48
The best strategy for Labour was always going to be to wait for the Nats to table their referendum bill and then table an amendment, incorporating a question with less biased wording than all this cobblers, which no-one can make head or tail of, about “opening negotiations with Westminster with a view to independence”. This is the position which Wendy has now adopted and it is by no means a climbdown.

Wendy remains committed to a referendum in principle, but she’s hardly going to support the Nats’ attempts to rig the result with a question which could have been devised by one of Mugabe’s advisors, is she? All you sad Nat Fanatics out there can just shut it: Wendy’s now arrived at the only sensible position, end of story!
180

John Blackley,

Florida 14/05/2008 14:37:05
I don't have a comment on the rights or wrongs of this article - all that might be said has been.

I do have some advice for Ms. Alexander and her 'handlers': You will be well-advised to limit the opportunities for photographing Ms. Alexander, at least until she becomes more aware of her facial expressions.

Each photograph of her that I've seen over the past few weeks looks as if she's either pulling a funny face for a child or suffering from quite severe constipation.
181

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 14:45:51
John Blackley (197): "Each photograph of her that I've seen over the past few weeks looks as if she's either pulling a funny face for a child or suffering from quite severe constipation"

The French have the term "jolie--laide", literally "pretty--ugly", to describe women (France being France) whose beauty is somewhat odd, often seeming to vary enormously between photos, and I'd so classify Alexander. Beatrice Dalle was another: either gorgeous or weird --- that probably dates me, but other men of a certain age might empathise . . .
182

Alan B,

14/05/2008 14:46:41
#191 Publius

"To conflate the two muddies the water."

Have to total disagree with there. To me if u are joining a club or a union it is important the type of union u are joining. U do not join a union at any cost.

It also conflict with ur argument that the national conversation should be more open to other options.

Many in the tory party are pro-eu just not the eu with social chapter, euro etc.

Many on this forum argue for fiscal autonomy while in the union. i have sympathy for that view. U simply cannot ask someone to make a decision without know the alternatives.

Yes many might want the union no matter what.

As i have previously said i am not against a confederal uk. But would vote independence because i am not holding my breath.

If someone supports federalism and it is not on offer. will they support the union or independence? who knows. that is why support for independence drops when more options are given.






183

,

14/05/2008 14:50:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
184

Alan B,

14/05/2008 14:51:04
#The Master

"which no-one can make head or tail of, about “opening negotiations with Westminster with a view to independence”."

From newsnight last night the program had consulted some constitutional lawyer (i think that was it anyway) who said the question would have to be phrased similar to that which the snp are proposing.

Seemingly it is to do with the restrictions on the powers of the sp. ie they cannot hold a referendum on independence but can hold one on negotating one.

Seems daft to me. Yes the sp should have the power to hold a referndum and have it legally binding.
185

Tory_Boy,

The deep south 14/05/2008 14:51:19
Anyone interested in joining our ‘Freedom for England’ campaign? Our aim is to secure a referendum for the people of England to determine if they want to continue to belong to the UK. Just imagine the trouble this would save you. We could negotiate the terms of secession with you and then you could dance your jigs (incidentally an English dance) anywhere you like.
186

Neil Waugh,

Old Strathcona 14/05/2008 14:51:58
Whatever you do and no matter how humiliated you may feel, Wendy, please, please DO NOT RESIGN!!
Independent Scots - both homeland and over the pond - need you right where you are.
Leading, as only you can, the incompetent forces of the rotten union.
It makes our task a whole lot easier.
187

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 14:53:46
Alan B (195): "I would like to see an assessment of the impact the euro would have on the scottish economy."

I agree that this is important. As I've said in earlier posts, I feel the SNP is avoiding fiscal issues behind the vague claim that an independent Scotland would continue with Sterling. My own view is that, at least initially, there would be little option other than to create a new central bank and Pound Scots, following which Scotland could move to the Euro (possibly even without EU membership -- let's see what happens to Iceland on this!). The main effect would, of course, be the cost of currency volatility with England, Scotland's main trading partner, but this would be an irritation, not a major issue. As for investment, the Euro would probably be preferable to a new Pound Scots, as would be the umbrella of the ECB -- the general regulatory and fiscal atmosphere would be much more important.

There is also the legal point that, if Scotland obtains EU membership, then Euro use is, ultimately, mandatory. However, Sweden has already avoided this condition by refusing to hold the an initial required referendum, so it's clearly possible to defer this for as long as desired.
188

,

14/05/2008 14:54:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
189

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 14:56:30
#182 3 a please. Federalism with Fiscal Autonomy - I know it is a very devolved type of federalism but I honestly believe it could work. I'm sure some Nats could live with that kind of constitutional arrangement if an independence vote were lost.
190

Alex X,

14/05/2008 14:57:21
202 Toryboy, good luck with your plans. Hopefully you retain your place in the EU, on the permanent five UN security Council and your seat at the G8.

Jiggedy jiggedy as Iain Gray might say.
191

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 14:57:44
118 All Politicians are the same,Scotland 14/05/2008 11:14:30

WRONG!!!

It does not set a 'precedence', as it was part of the 'Charter of Union' between Serbia and Montenegro, and Serbia had to withdraw any and all claims against Montenegro, as part of the dissolution of said 'charter':

After the May referendum, in which Montenegro voted for dissolution of the Union, they went on to declare Independence on 3rd June 2006,with under the terms of the Charter of Union, Serbia followed suit and declared Independence on 5th June 2006, with Kosovo doing the same in 2008.

So not precedence in law or anywhere else for that matter.
192

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 15:00:01
195 Alan B
There is something in what you said in the first paragraph but there are so many imponderables. business and prospective investors may say "you talk a good game on taxation but can you deliver." we all know that Scotland has very high levels of public expenditure. In the short term this might be sustained by oil revenues but North Sea oil production is declining rapidly. There are various projections over its future level but none of them are particularly optimistic. It has already declined by over 50% in 8 years.

At some stage in the future some hard decisions will have to be made. Can the present level of public services be maintained with lower taxation if the North sea oil is in such decline.

Did you read the comments of Sir Tom Farmer in the Sunday Timesthe other week. Even as one of the biggest contributors to the SNP he does not think the Scottish economy is ready for all of this. e talked about "two generations" as the time span.
193

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 15:02:19
#191 Which is one reason why I'd prefer to have the vote sooner rather than later. Get the damn thing over with - we know the arguments. If independence wins I can live with that as long as people's legitimate concerns are dealt with - if we are going down that route then for God'ssake it had better work.

Equally, if independence were defeated then that should not end matters - there should be a sensible debate - not one that is as narrow as Calman and the National Conversation are.
194

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 15:04:08
#196 What wording would you like that would be within the powers of the Scotland Act?
195

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 15:04:46
The seperation of a union of a reasonably modern state and it worked well with Serbia retaining all memberships and montenegro reapplying and having a seat at the UN in a short time frame. The break up of the USSR also saw Russia retain all memberships. Now let me think here, are the UN anmd EU going to look at these and say "hey that worked quite well" given the British influence in both organisations a bitle like "precedence" and do it again. Real Politik or try something completely different. MMM lets think.
196

kimba,

14/05/2008 15:13:57
Scottish labour must learn to be patient,give the nats enough rope and they will hang themselves!
197

AllyFraeEmbra,

Near the Castle 14/05/2008 15:14:43
I think that Wee Eck should have called UUendy's bluff and held the referendum today. Since 95% of Scotland's pro-union believers are away in Manchester waiving their Union Jacks, the independence vote would have sailed through. :-))
198

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 15:15:58
#195 "I would like to see an assessment of the impact the euro would have on the scottish economy."

I believe - and the Nats will correct me if I am wrong - that it was their policy for an independent Scotland to join the Euro zone only if 5 key tests were passed.

Is that still the policy or has it changed?

Also - why did the SNP abandon their previous policy of an independent Scottish currency?

If the 5 tests were not met would it be sensible to keep using Sterling without having any say in intersest rates?

Why not consider having an independent Scottish currency if the 5 tests are not met?
199

The Master,

14/05/2008 15:16:38
#201 Alan B: if the referendum question can only be phrased in the way it has been for constitutional reasons, then quite frankly it’s not worth asking! What’s more important here? Pleasing the lawyers or enabling the voice of the people to be properly heard? If you Nats are unable to do any better with your question then you should do us all a favour and just give it a rest!
200

Alan B,

14/05/2008 15:21:32
#Fairfax

"I feel the SNP is avoiding fiscal issues behind the vague claim that an independent Scotland would continue with Sterling"

Should that not be avoiding monetary issues. :)
201

brownlie,

14/05/2008 15:24:42
196 The master

Quite right! this is obviously a cunning plan by the SNP who are aware that our traditional voters would find difficulty in making head or tail of a question containing long words.

Furthermore, if the nats want independence they should go into it without any consultation with our UK government.
202

Alan B,

14/05/2008 15:25:03
#217 The Master

Sorry that does not make sense. Effectly u are saying that the nats should give the referendum a rest because labour created a parliament that is too weak to allow a direct question to be asked.
203

John S,

14/05/2008 15:30:20
#188 re read my #176:"Independence would leave Scotland and something called the rest' in the same legal boat. If Scotland had to re-apply, so would the rest." these are the words of the Lord MacKenzie-Stuart, a former president of the European Court of Justice.
I think was referring "and something called the rest" would be the new UK minus Scotland ie England,Northern Ireland,Wales, Isle of Man etc which could retain the name UK but would be equal in status with both having to re apply to join the EU.
Now read what was said by Emile Noel who said Scotland and the remainder of the UK would be equally entitled, and obliged, to continue the existing full membership of the EU.Scottish independence would create two states, which would have "equal status with each other and the other states".
So Scotland and the new UK would have automatic entry into the EU with none of the present members exercising a veto to prevent this from happening if what Emile Noel said is correct.
204

,

14/05/2008 15:32:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
205

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 15:37:08
#223

We are pointing out what has happened every other time something like this occurs, lets face it neither Stuart or Noel get to make decisions merely have opinions. The big hitters will make the decisions, Germany, France, Italy, Spain and the rump UK within the EU and the security council in the UN probaly at head of state level.
206

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 15:37:11
#218 I have supported the idea of a multi-option referendum for some time.

However, given the inability of the Scottish electorate to complete a ballot paper correctly at the last set of elections I have altered my views as to using STV to decide the outcome. Perhaps it would be better to have a run-off system similar to the French with the top two options facing each other in a second ballot.

Some might complain that that would be tootime-consuming or costly - i'd disagree - on an issue like this it is worth spending time and money so we get a genuine reflection of voters opinions - whatever they may be.

Also I'd like there to be 4 options - I'll let the constitutional lawyers get the wording right:

1. the status quo - keep the Scottish Parliament as it is

2. independence

3. greater powers for the Scottish Parliament including Fiscal Autonomy

4. abolish the Scottish Parliament

I know some might not like option 4 - I don't either - but I do think it is right that those who don't support it have their say as well.

I also realise that my options don't include Federalism explicitly - however, if option 3 were passed I believe that the debate does not end there - that moves towards a more federal structure would be more likely. Nationalists too I suspect would not have a problem with option 3 as it would not close the door on independence forever. No doubt they would continue to campaign (as is there right) for independence.

What I don't want to see is a simple yes-no ballot - if independence lost it would also bring an end to any hopes of further devolved power. The hardline unionists would use it as an excuse to stymie any further decentralisation. Also the truth be said - there are many who are would not support independence but are not happy with the status quo either - I'm one of them. If it were a simple yes-no vote I honestly now don't know which way I'd vote.
207

Alan B,

14/05/2008 15:38:14
#The Federalist

Based on ur option

"Federalism with Fiscal Autonomy"

I am assuming that the pulled options would be eu membership, defence, foreign policy and currency.

Questions
1)a)do u reject the right of the sp to select to adopt the euro unless the whole of the uk does so even if an economic judegment is made that it is in our economic interests?
b)would u support scotland joining the euro if in our economic interests, within a federal uk (while the rump stays out). I could see northern ireland joining this route.
2)do u think it is in scotland interests to continue funding nuclear weapons? eg Given fiscal autonomy we would we not need to spend the money building our economy.
3)do u think the uk would better represent scotland interests in the eu that an independent scotland?
4)What advantage would do u see constructing it as federal rather than confederal? As i see it conferderal means sovereigntly lies in scotland and any change to the relationship within the union would therefore have to be approved by scotland.

5)Gvien that a federal structure means that scotland and england have separate parliaments. (missing out wales on purpose as they have different powers and will make the whole discussion much more complicated)

What will the central parliament look like?
a)will england really have a separate parliament or will it be mps wearing 2 hats both as english and uk mps. ie an english and uk parliament within westminster
b)a separate english parliament with different mps.

if (a) then what will the scottish mps be doing all yr. eg should the scottish mps be abolished with msps sitting in the central parliament for pulled issues once in a blue moon for all they would be doing.

if (b) would u have a much smaller central parliament or a president for the few pulled powers accountable to the 4 separate parliaments.
208

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 14/05/2008 15:43:54
#217 "if the referendum question can only be phrased in the way it has been for constitutional reasons, then quite frankly it’s not worth asking!"

Unfortunately for you, around 90% of the people of Scotland disagree with you on that. So maybe it's you who should "give it a rest" and let the people of Scotland have the voice they so overwhelmingly desire, whatever that voice may turn out to say.

#186

Your ignorance of the facts is getting wearisome. Scottish independence would of necessity involve the repeal of the Act which created the UK, and therefore the inevitable dissolution of that body. What the rump UK subsequently decided to call itself is a matter of little if any interest to anyone, but it certainly couldn't go by its current name, because the nation that name (in full) describes would no longer exist.
209

The Master,

14/05/2008 15:44:23
#212 Federalist: I’m no lawyer, but if clear wording cannot be found within the powers of the Scotland Act, then the referendum’s not worth holding. Do you have any suggestions of your own? The only question which would produce a result which would not be ridiculed is “Do you think Scotland should be separate from the rest of the UK, yes or no?” If that’s not within the powers of the Scotland Act, then the whole idea of the parliament’s organising a referendum should be abandoned.

210

The Master,

14/05/2008 15:46:40
#230 Spook: are you a fakey? You never had the "™" before, or have you been deleted yet again for sheer nastiness towards other posters who do not share your fanatical nationalism?
211

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 14/05/2008 15:52:47
#231

Youre inability to accept what has happened in other occassions is very likey to reoccur if Scotland seperates from the UK is equally wearisome, however I should not use the seperate word, everyone from now on seperation is to be known as "Negotiation ". International law is a flexible and mostly unwritten piece, decisions are made pragmatically and by the big players. No one cares what happened in 1707 only the best way to deal with what may happen in 2010.
212

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 14/05/2008 16:10:49
#235 It's already been pointed out to you that your account of what happened on previous occasions is in fact wrong. But no matter how many times you repeat it, "Great Britain" will still mean "the entire island of Britain", and the "UK" will still need a name change if Scotland leaves.
213

Edward,

14/05/2008 16:11:17
#184 Fairfax
Your suggestion that the legal and political identity of the UK would almost certainly be vested in England is very desperate stuff to say the least and isn’t based on any factual information. You clearly really don’t understand the legal position of ‘the United Kingdom’ as set out in the treaty and act of 1707. Your inference that England would be a ‘successor state’ that would retain the title of ‘United Kingdom’ is too laughable for words. Firstly it just would not happen, secondly what is England united to, to be a united kingdom?? You fail to grasp the reality that there are ONLY two kingdoms that make up the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which are Scotland and England. Then you go on to state that as England has 90% of the population and GDP of the union, but fail to grasp, as many others do that ‘the United Kingdom’ as such is not a singular country, but a union of two countries, hence the ‘United’. You will find that international law isn’t as pragmatic as you would like it. The English government will settle for the title of ‘Kingdom of England’ or just plain England, which is internationally recognised anyway
214

The Master,

14/05/2008 16:12:20
#221 brownlie: it’s funny that, in polls, support for independence goes through the roof every time the Nats’ preferred question is asked but returns to a more natural level when a simple question such as “should Scotland be separate from the rest of the UK, yes or no?” is put.

Where I would agree with you is that SNP voters do on the whole tend to be better educated than Labour voters: the SNP have become adept at mopping up votes of socio economic class C2 types and above whose counterparts in England have turned to the Tories!

#236 Spook: I keep a spare “Master” moniker (complete with hard space) in case the original ever gets deleted, but it’s never happened to date, because the Master is programmed to be cerebral and grounded!
215

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 16:12:57
#229 My (brief) answers:

1)a) No.

1)b) Yes (with reservations about the euro). As you may have noticed - I don't particularly think a single currency works in the UK either!!

2) Absolutely. As long as there were the proper checks and balances in place.

3) No - I think we have a greater say pooling our economic power - what I think is required is greater devolvement of power within the UK to influence those interests.

4) I believe it could be possible to change arrangements so that if a future Scottish Goverement (or other Federal Government) wished to control those other aspects then it would have the power to hold a plebiscite without reference to a UK Federal Parliament.

5) One set of MPs elected by PR - each Federal unit would elect members by PR to serve in a UK-wide Parliament - meeting less feequently than at present. I would also like to see the Lords replaced by a UK Senate. Definite no to a President.
216

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 16:14:10
#233 STV - Single Transferable Vote.
217

Edward,

14/05/2008 16:17:05
#193 Ugly George
Your right it really doesn’t matter at the end of the day, how many EU countries like Scotland
But I think you’ll find that the EU will be hard pushed to reject renewing Scotland’s membership or barring any application. After all Scotland does have the fishing as well as other resources. Do you really think the EU are going to cut of their collective noses to spite their face?
Both England and Scotland will be welcomed and the EU will expand yet again
218

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 16:17:47
181 Fairfax,14/05/2008 14:14:41

I think you are misreading my post, I'll try to clarify it, Using the rationale of 'All Politicians are the same' then after a dissolution of the Union his scenario would apply.

His scenario being based round the Union State of Serbia and Montenegro, which has got as much in common with the Treaty of Bumbles' Bin as it has to do with the Treaty of Union betwixt the Kingdoms of Scotland and England.
219

The Master,

14/05/2008 16:19:29
Alan B writes:
#217 The Master

Sorry that does not make sense. Effectly u are saying that the nats should give the referendum a rest because labour created a parliament that is too weak to allow a direct question to be asked.

Yes, I wouldn’t disagree with that. If the Nats really want to advance their much discredited separation agenda through a referendum with a direct question, then they only have to win sufficient seats at Westminster to exert their influence in the event of a hung parliament. That’s called democracy!
220

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 14/05/2008 16:23:31
#214 kimba

Again showing her poor English language skills.
221

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 16:25:43
#246 I know - your jokes are keech though . .

;)
222

Miss H,

14/05/2008 16:30:25
240 I think the argument that the wording is crucial are a bit over stated.

The SNP’s question is I AGREE that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state.
Or I DISAGREE etc.

That is not loaded either way.

On the other hand a question asking whether Scotland should be separate from the rest of the UK would be misleading. Separate can have a number of meanings up to and including digging a trench along the border.
Independent on the other hand is a clear statement of what the SNP wants for Scotland.

If you want to use the word separate however how about: Should Scotland become separate from the rest of the UK or remain subservient to it?
223

Edward,

14/05/2008 16:33:27
Getting back to topic!

Book your seats now online to watch FMQ's tomorrow
kick off at 12 noon and see how many times Wendy Alexander and others say 'Blank Cheque' Hopefully they will have given up on that one and come up with a new one
the last 3 (or more) FMQ's have been a laugh a minute
(remember Wendy's - I dont have a third question, despite lodging 3 questions with presiding officer)
http://www.holyrood.tv/
224

sciura grigia,

Livingston 14/05/2008 16:40:37
I am an extremely bewildered,confused, astounded, upset, angry and last, but by no means least, mortified and embarassed labour voter.

Are there any Scottish labour voters out there who DON'T feel some, if not all, of the above due to the shameful, opportunistic and adventuristic antics of the elder Alexander sibling?

(I know plenty of non-labour voters will take great delight in my present plight, but pleeeeeaaaaase show a little magnanimous compassion before piling in with the gleeful and/or sarky comments!!!)

225

Alan B,

14/05/2008 16:45:05
#The Master

"If the Nats really want to advance their much discredited separation agenda"

Exactly why is it discredited? I know u do not believe in it but opinion polls over the last 9 yrs have apparently quite an even split on whether the public want independence.

To many the union simply does not work in scotlands interests. I would have to say the union as it is currently consituted is arguably discredited. We have had direct rule which scotland did not want imposed for the 17yrs of thatcher rule. We had the majority view in the 79 referendum ignored. And currently support shows overwhelming support for more powers.

U seem more interest in ur own narrow point of view rather than democracy. The idea that the no matter how many seats the nats win in the sp it does not matter and independence has to be decided by westminster is just not credible.

226

brownlie,

14/05/2008 16:46:28
228 The fed

Well fed, "Given the inability of the Scottish electorate to fill in a ballot paper correctly...." - do you mean all of us?

If that is the case what is the point of your learned arguments on here? If we are unable to correctly fill in a form we have little chance of getting any benefit from, or understanding of, your intellectual dissertations.
227

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 16:47:59
#232 The Master
You're right. Any referendum question should be short, simple and straightforward and lead only to a yes or a no.
The only question at issue is Scotland independent and outside the UK? - yes or no.

The SNP's formulation is flawed:
(1) It is too long. No-one is going to read all of that in a polling booth.
(2) It is difficult for someone with only minimum education to understand. If you don't believe me, try it out on someone who left school at 16, 30 years ago and without any qualifications.
(3) It is ambiguous. If you answer yes, it does not necessarily mean you favour independence. (This, of course, is why the SNP chose it.)

Talk of legal difficulties with other formulations is piffle. Any referendum on independence set up by Holyrood only has consultative status. There is no reason why Holyrood should not consult voters about anything.

228

Jimmy the Pie,

14/05/2008 16:48:34
Another big day tomorrow - FMQ's!!!

Best viewing of the week by far!

Come on down Red Wendy and bring it on!
229

Publius,

London 14/05/2008 16:49:39
On a different point Darling has justs knocked eighteen quid per head off the notional take for LIT. Will Swinney need to get his abacus out again?
230

Arfur,

14/05/2008 16:50:36
#253 sciura grigia - we mostly slag the Labour voters that still think Labour are the bees knees.

I was once also a Labour voter but I changed to SNP. I wanted my vote to go to a party that fought for the Scottish people, not hold them back.

As you are a current Labour voter and seem more sensible than some of the trolls we put up with on this forum, can I ask you some questions?

How do you think the SNP are performing?
If you were finally fed up of Labour who would you turn to?
Do you think Labour can realistically come back from this (specifically in Scotland)?
231

Alan B,

14/05/2008 16:51:53
#258 Publius

Just shows the reason for fiscal autonomy.
232

Saoghal Beag,

14/05/2008 16:52:10
250 Edward, i heard a rumour "The Twist" willl be played in the background every time UBendy moves to speak.
233

Arfur,

14/05/2008 16:52:48
#256 Publius

"(3) It is ambiguous. If you answer yes, it does not necessarily mean you favour independence. (This, of course, is why the SNP chose it.)"

What tripe you talk.
234

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 16:58:12
Edward (239): "Your suggestion that the legal and political identity of the UK would almost certainly be vested in England is very desperate stuff"

Did you miss the part concerning 90% of the population and GDP?
Still, I see you have ignored my earlier example that the rights and obligations of the USSR were transferred to Russia after the dissolution of the USSR. I wonder why? It is, after all, a recent precedent for Security Council members.

"Your inference that England would be a ‘successor state’ that would retain the title of ‘United Kingdom’ is too laughable for words. Firstly it just would not happen, secondly what is England united to, to be a united kingdom??"

My key point is that England would become the successor state: it would retain not the title "United Kingdom" but the rights and obligations of the UK. The name is not crucial for me. However, a state can essentially choose its own name, so "United Kingdom of England" would also be fine -- after all, the various Anglo-Saxon kingdoms ultimately unified as England predate Scotland. Still, I would prefer "England"

"Then you go on to state that as England has 90% of the population and GDP of the union"

I stated that because it was (roughly speaking) true.

"but fail to grasp, as many others do that ‘the United Kingdom’ as such is not a singular country, but a union of two countries,"

You seem to have forgotten Wales and Northern Ireland here.

"You will find that international law isn’t as pragmatic as you would like it."

Well let's see, shall we?

"The English government will settle for the title of ‘Kingdom of England’ or just plain England"

You seem to believe that I want the name of UK to continue for England. My point was that the current international rights and obligations of the UK would be transferred to England (or the UK of England, Wales and NI -- the name is not particularly my concern) following Scottish independence. After all, most of the world seems to wron
235

kimba,

14/05/2008 16:59:02
247. In what way troll!
236

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 17:00:19
Fairfax continued: After all, most of the world seems to have wrongly identified England and Britain. Reprehensible of them though it is, it will act in England's favour as the claimant to successor status.
237

kimba,

14/05/2008 17:01:38
Anyway,good luck to Rangers tonight,keep the union flag flying!
238

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 17:04:00
Alan B. (219): "Should that not be avoiding monetary issues. :)"

Fair enough! This is all being typed on a long drive to Ardnamurchan (obviously I'm not the driver!).
239

Jimmy the Pie,

14/05/2008 17:05:20
266 Kimba

Aye and ---- the Pope is it???
240

The Master,

14/05/2008 17:07:01
#249 Miss H: the SNP’s question is fatally flawed, whichever way you look at it: all it seeks is permission to “negotiate a settlement” and voters are no doubt under the impression that they’d have a getout when they saw the actual terms. In reality, there would probably be so much momentum behind the process that there’d be no stopping it. Why are you Nats so afraid of the public being asked if Scotland should be “separate”? Is not that the very basis of nationalism, whatever gloss the SNP are forced to put on it so as not to “frighten the children”?
241

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 14/05/2008 17:08:55
I accept Publius's point that Tom Hunter wants an early referendum.However Tom Farmer does not want to rush it.This is anecdotal evidence rather than survey data.The only business survey that I know about indicates increasing business support for independence and a majority who like the work of the SNP government Among supporters of independence (like myself) some want an earlier referendum,some do not.I want an an earlier referendum but this has nothing to do with a belief that delay until 2010 causes uncertainty.

Wendy Alexander's claim that waiting to 2010 was causing uncertainty is no more than opinion based on anecdotal evidence.That is classic unionist tactics.It was claimed that Devolution would cause chaos and uncertainty.Jack McConnell claimed on TV that the election of an SNP government would cause uncertainty among the business community in the USA.As history shows,the emergence of new nations does not damage their economy.

Wendy Alexander confused opinion with fact.Of course she needed an excuse to explain her unlikely conversion to referendum.She needed a cover for her real motive,which was to damage the SNP,nothing to do with consulting the people.I understand the motive but the results are disasterious for her party and her.She has managed to:
1) Look indecisive and make Gordon Brown look weak
2) She has demonstrated how little authority Scottish Labour has when London says no
3) She has put Labour into a difficult situation when the SNP introduce their referendum bill.They don't want to support it but if they block it by nit picking around the nature of the questions,they will pay an electoral price.
4) She has caused a problem if,as is likely, Calman recommends increased powers for the Scottish Parliament.Do Labour include that question in a referendum ,or not.Alec Salmond would,Labours position is now unclear.
242

Alan B,

14/05/2008 17:10:37
With regard to the status of the rest of the uk after independence. What does it matter to scotland whether the rump uk continues as the uk is today?

The only issue that is important to scotland is scotlands status with regard to the EU.

243

Paula,

14/05/2008 17:15:07
And yet, they still can't find one single photo of her looking as "intelligent and brilliant" as she says she is.

Caption: (She is in the Parly, looking at Salmond)
"I close my eyes and count to ten
And when I open them
You’re still here
I close my eyes and count again
I can’t believe it but you’re still here."
244

Nikostratos,

14/05/2008 17:15:22
#257 Jimmy the Pie,14/05/2008 16:48:34
Another big day tomorrow - FMQ's!!!

Best viewing of the week by far!


Jimmy get a life Jimmy! you are one sad fecker.........

Tell me Jimmy is Wendy is so useless as the Labour leader why is it such a triumph for Alex if he gets the better of her.

Jimmy stays in so he can watch F.M.Qs........sad sad sad........
245

Rednose Harry,

Wallasey 14/05/2008 17:16:23
Wendy had the support of the Prime Minister.A LIE.
The SNP "have turned down the chance to end the uncertainty" - what uncertainty?I thought it was quite clear that a referendum would not be held until 2010.
Am I missing something here or is SLAB completely bonkers??
246

Alan B,

14/05/2008 17:18:03
#Rednose Harry

"what uncertainty?"

It is uncertain whether brown or wendy will still be in power in 2010.

247

Nikostratos,

14/05/2008 17:19:40
#269

Independent and separate are one and the same but the snp are frightened to actually say so because the poll ratings drop dramatically...............
248

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:25:26
Caption for the photo -

"It" says "Ready or Not, Here I Come, Bring It On"
249

Jimmy the Pie,

14/05/2008 17:27:04
#273 Niko

That's a bit rich coming from you, going by the drivel and rubbish you spout.

One day when I've a bit more time I'll explain to you what BBC I-player is.
250

Rednose Harry,

Wallasey 14/05/2008 17:28:38
#275 Alan B Thanks but is that 10 past eight tonight or do we have to wait??????????????
251

The Master,

14/05/2008 17:31:16
#254 Alan B: how can any policy which is predicated on Scotland’s maintaining its current level of prosperity through the finite resource of oil not be discredited? Of course separation has to be decided by Westminster: the SP is little more than a devolved regional parliament and ultimate sovereignty constitutionally rests with Westminster. There is nothing fundamentally undemocratic about the UK’s constitutional setup, which stands comparison to any other European democracy, so I don’t know where you’re coming from here.
252

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 17:36:34
Suomi (270): "As history shows,the emergence of new nations does not damage their economy."

History merely shows that it need not damage their economies. To give examples, the United Provinces (i.e. the Netherlands) became richer after it declared independence from Spain in the 16th century, whilst Ireland became poorer after seceding from the UK.
253

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:38:34
Labour MSPs force Wendy into another U-turn on referendum

That's the headline.

Looks like the Slabber MSPs are bricking it, or want to get rid of U-Bendy
254

Edward,

14/05/2008 17:40:25
#263 Fairfax
You seem to have a problem reading what I wrote!
I said that you could not have a 'United' Kingdom of England, if England is the single and only Kingdom
'You seem to have forgotten Wales and Northern Ireland here' eh nope, there not Kingdoms, didnt you know that?
Wales is a princepality of England and Northern Ireland is a province , not a kingdom
But regardless
Your assumption that because England has 90% of the population of the union, that this will make England the successor state to the UK. Thats simply to arrogant for words, as population does not come into. I have to refer you again to the treaty and act of union 1707, which was between two Kingdoms
You quoted the USSR to Russia example, but in reality bears no resemblence to the Union of England and Scotland. The USSR was not created by democratic union with the other socialist states that made up the USSR, they were forcefully taken over, there was no 'equal partner' to Russia! Soviet Russia was the basis of the USSR, which had a seat on the security council. After the fall of the communist state, Russia inheritated the security council seat as it was more or less the same as the USSR (remember no equal states involved)
You will find that England does not automatically become the 'successor state' and that England has to negotiate with Scotland over areas that are of common interest. Examples being Commonwealth protectorate countries.One thing is for sure England will not automatically get a seat on the security council, instead will probably go on the rotation system that the UN operate and will share with Scotland
255

Capital Son,

Out There 14/05/2008 17:41:31
Nice Photie
256

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:42:39
#285 "whilst Ireland became poorer after seceding from the UK"

not poorer, just happier to be independent and "poor", but free from English rule
257

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:43:27
Labour MSPs force Wendy into another U-turn on referendum

That's the headline.

Looks like the Slabber MSPs are bricking it, or want to get rid of U-Bendy
258

Davie from Irvine,

Ayrshire coast 14/05/2008 17:46:44
I am fully in favour of Wendy staying on as Scottish labour leader, she is doing a wonderful job and is good for Scotland.
259

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:48:24
another caption for the photie -

Ohhhhhhhh, that was a big jobby
260

Edward,

14/05/2008 17:49:23
#285 Fairfax
'To give examples, the United Provinces (i.e. the Netherlands) became richer after it declared independence from Spain in the 16th century, whilst Ireland became poorer after seceding from the UK'
That is such a lame example as it conveniently overlooks the fact that most if not all the Dutch wealth was gained from its overseas colonies in the far east and in the caribbean, where as Ireland did not have any! So not exactly a good comparison
Ironically it was later the Dutch King William of Orange and his business interest in those same colonies as well as the English East India company that denied Scotland a fair chance in setting up its own colony in Central America, allthough he was also King of Scotland, he never spent much time in Scotland and was probably instrumental in encouraging the Spanish to attach the Scots and instructed the English Navy of the day not to lift a finger to help
261

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 17:49:25
245 The Master,14/05/2008 16:19:29

It's not the 'Nats' that are prattling on about a Referendum.

It is the totally London Centric, Hysterically Terrified and Discredited Onionstas that are doing that, me owld son!

And by the by a country without a written constitution, can compare favorably with EU countries that have adopted in it's entirety the ECHR.

As a supposed 'Free and Democratic Country' this Westminster government has effectively torn up the mainstay of the English Judicial system, the Magna Carta---- Trials without juries, No Habeas Corpus, detention without charge or trial longer than even the good ol US of A, Extradition of Citizens to a foreign power with no need for presentation of any formal evidence....yeah right!!!!!

227 All Politicians are the same,Scotland 14/05/2008 15:37:08

Do you actually think that is how membership to the UN works, and as for the EU will an Independent England hold as much 'clout' in the EU as it has at the moment?
However it would be a strange day indeed if Scotland were rejected form the EU, given the natural wealth of Scotland and it's Continental shelf.

Another big Oil find the other day. In the East Rinnes field in the German Ocean.

As an aside does anyone remember a certain Mr Bliar and Mr Brown telling us how much financially off we would be under an SNP Government?

Well sorry about this Lads an Lassie, but they were correct!!..........................................................................................But none of it is the SNP's doing, it all stems from that bankrupt socialite Gordo an his wee Darling, and if UUUendy was FM we would be one helluva lot more worse off financially!!!
262

Alan B,

14/05/2008 17:49:36
#283 The Master

I am coming from:

Whether scotland remains within the uk or not should be decided by a referendum. We can argue over the question. The question should be as neutral as possible. I would rather a simple question asking whether people want independence yes or no.

Ur previous posts basically said that a scottish parliament should not be able to run an referendum. That to me is undemocratic.

The idea that only westminster can decide if scotland becomes independent and can decide to hold a referendum is undemocratic. The idea as u stated that we effectively have to wait until england is split between tory and labour and then holding the balance of power could if one agrees hold a referendum is simply undemocratic.

U do not support independence fair enough, but the people of scotland should have the democratic right to choose. That only realistically is going to happen via the sp with a referendum.

"how can any policy which is predicated on Scotland’s maintaining its current level of prosperity through the finite resource of oil not be discredited?"

simple, we have done poorly economically within the union. growth less than 2% per yr on average for the last 30yrs. growth less than the uk as a whole. the gdp per capita ppp for the uk is less than most other small northern european countries

Luxembourg, Norway, Ireland, Switzerland, Iceland, Netherlands,Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Finland , Belgium

so the idea that u have to be in a big country has been completely discredited.

Scotland is either fundamentally incapable of performing aswell as these other countries or it is the union that has held us back.

The idea that scotland would not do better as an independent country has been completely discredited anyway. Even unionist economists say scotland would do well outside the union.

Less us be honest. If we stay with the union the probability is we will be considerably poorer economically over a period of time. Norway had s
263

sciura grigia,

Livingston 14/05/2008 17:49:40
#259 ARFUR:First of all, thanks for not rubbing salt in the wound .....To attempt to answer your questions:
Quite simply I think the snp are doing very well, especially given that they are a minority government: I think this is very much due to your savvy, confident (deservedly) leader Alex Salmond [I could weep with envy - the comparison is almost unbearable]. Also, the government as a whole comes accross as fresh, determined united and enthusiastic.
I'm not quite ready to contemplate giving my vote to another party YET ...... and linked to that
Thirdly, it will definitely have to ditch Alexander asap to give it ANY (admittedly very slight) chance of coming back.
264

Hamish Simpson,

14/05/2008 17:50:56

At least she has her looks to fall back on
265

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/05/2008 17:51:08
292 Brian M,Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:48:24

Disgusting!!!!




But fcukin funny ;-))
266

Edward,

14/05/2008 17:51:11
just to lighten the mood
Looking at the picture above is Wendy sitting on her washing machine during its high speed drying cycle?
267

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:51:54
#291

Seems that she is not Scottish Labour leader, merely the leader of labour MSPs, seems that there is no such thing as "Scottish" Labour and the leader of the Labour party throughout UK is one Gordon British Broon
268

Alan B,

14/05/2008 17:53:14
cont...

Less us be honest. If we stay with the union the probability is we will be considerably poorer economically over a period of time. Norway had similar wealth to us in the 70s and it has completely outperformed us.

By all means stay with the union. But less us atleast say there is a price to pay and that is economic prosperity.

Do u honestly think any unionist governmetn will address our poor economic growth and delivery 3%+ growth. Do u think any will deliver the 4% the other small countries have averaged over a period of time.

269

morris,

edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:54:19
276

That would explain why Labour say the SNP want to "break up" the United Kingdom,when in fact they want to create (again) a nation which existed as one of Europe's oldest.
The Unionistas use negative terms like threatening the "integrity" of the UK !

It means quite simply a multi national state v an independent nation. Both have identical legitimacy,and the world is full of independent nations.
270

Davie from Irvine,

Ayrshire coast 14/05/2008 17:54:41
301 Absolutely so Brian, but dont you agree Wendy is doing a great job for Scotland. ?
271

morris,

edinburgh 14/05/2008 17:59:38
What is remarkable is Wendy was ever given the job!
She is an even bigger numptie than her brother,and he has already screwed up royally,which would be an aoutomatic sacking anywhere else.
Who would have thought that Scotland would have two Alexanders the LAST !
272

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 18:01:03
#304 Davie

It is realy very difficult to work out what U-Bendy is doing and who might benefit
273

Richardinho,

14/05/2008 18:02:58
I don't think it would be particularly to the SNPs benefit if Wendy were to resign. Nonetheless, I feel that if I were in her position, I would since it's clear that she cannot count on the backing of her colleagues.
274

Alex X,

14/05/2008 18:05:19
Oh great here's yet ANOTHER U-Turn by Labour.
They plan to amend the Government’s motion on Free Personal Care to remove the call for attendance allowance to be reinstated.

Yet it was only after Lord Sutherland's report was released that Margaret Curran said:

“The report raises vital issues for the future of free personal and nursing care for the elderly in Scotland. Labour fully accepts the conclusions of the report and its recommendations.”


U-Turn U-Turn U-Turn U-Turn U-Turn U-Turn U-Turn U-Turn
275

Richardinho,

14/05/2008 18:07:13
I see people discussing the question; I heard Malcolm Chisholm saying he wanted 'leave the union' inserted in to the question.

Personally I will vote for indpendence, however the questions phrased. I suspect most people who go into the booth will have already made up their minds and simply tick yes or no and not study the question in any great detail.
276

Truely English,

14/05/2008 18:09:52
Sad to hear that there are no ethnic Scots anymore as it seems they are all Civic Nationalists.

England already has a Parliament. Why would she want or need another one.

277

Davie from Irvine,

Ayrshire coast 14/05/2008 18:10:06
306 Brian The Scottish nation could benefit with Wendys unpopularity and immature outbursts are likely to help the independence cause,after all we are getting ripped off in the union and union Broon is taking the rip like his predecessors.
278

Raymond Thomas Brooke,

Leven England 14/05/2008 18:14:07
Gordon is coming up with "new" policies trying to save his skin,Can Wendy make an attempt at a come back too with a new name, we have had "LABOUR" now we have "NEW LABOUR",what about NEW U TURN LABOUR
279

Brian M,

Edinburgh 14/05/2008 18:26:58
Labour MSPs force Wendy into another U-turn on referendum

That's the headline.

280

SlyFifer,

California 14/05/2008 18:52:25
Agree wholeheartdly with #145. There is no economic benifit to an independant Scotland joining the EU. Infinately better is to be affiliated to the EU with perhaps the Scottish Pound, if that's what we would have, being pegged to the Euro (horrible name for a currency).
The Scotland can set it's own tax rates and use them for expanding economic growth. It would be wonderful to see a bottle of Whisky being sold in Scotland at the lowest price anywhere in the world, encouraging every tourist to take away their full tax free entitlement as a reminder of their visit. Such a shame I can buy a bottle here in California substantially cheaper than in Scotland.
281

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 14/05/2008 20:18:36
In response to Fairfax (#285( I should have said that generally new emerging nations have not had their economy damaged by independence.I was thinking of the new European countries,many of which are now full members of the EU and have greater representation than Scotland whicxh is deperately struggling to prevernt a reduction in its number of MEP's.Fairfax mentions the Republic of Irelend but even that country is now outperforming Scotland economically.

Actually this issue is not the point that I was making.My point was that Wendy Alexander was using scaremongering,based on no evidence to conceal the real reason for her unlikely conversion to allowing the Scottish people express their opinion.
282

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 20:33:07
In the photie wendy appears to be saying

If i shut my eyes and count to ten, i will wake up and this will all go away.
283

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 20:34:18
or it could be ohhhhmmmmm U TUUUUURN OHHHHMMMMM.
284

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 20:36:11
or even

i love blinking i do...........
285

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 20:38:35
some of us arent watching the footie although we are wishing rangers all the best.
286

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 20:44:15
#296 "The idea that only westminster can decide if scotland becomes independent and can decide to hold a referendum is undemocratic."

Totally agree - the decision to go independent or not should be the decision of the Scottish Electorate alone.

That is what self-determination means to me - the right to choose the political structure under which you are governed. I may have my own preferred structure but I am adamant that it is the right of the Scottish people to determine their own future. Whatever structure they support I will live with (as long as it is democratic) - what matters at the end of the day is that peoplr have a real choice and taht the structure when in place actually works effectively.
287

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 20:46:48
Edward (287): "I said that you could not have a 'United' Kingdom of England, if England is the single and only Kingdom"

I'll try again: "United" is merely an adjective -- there's no need for there to be more than one kingdom. To give an example, patriotic French writers have sometimes describe dit as "unie et indivisible", emphasizing the kingdom's (and later republic's path from disunity). As I pointed out in my earlier post, the name is easily justified histoically: England was originally formed by the unification of several Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, almost all of which predate Scotland.

"After the fall of the communist state, Russia inheritated the security council seat as it was more or less the same as the USSR"

Indeed. And yet you believe this doesn't apply to England and the UK because Russia was not a democratic formation, and for some strange reason you believe population and GDP share to be irrelevant. I suspect the international community will see it differently; hopefully we shall learn soon.

"One thing is for sure England will not automatically get a seat on the security council, instead will probably go on the rotation system that the UN operate and will share with Scotland"

Hmm. . . Scotland, finally recognized as a Great Power eclipsing England, will share the UN Security Council seat. Well, let's hope, shall we?
288

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 20:46:52
#321 Would that be the women then . . . ;)

. . . I'm banished to the bedroom watching the game . . . my wife and step-daughter are watching something completely different . . .

Have to go . . .it's back on again . . . mind you why I am bothered watching it - it's a cack game- 0-0 written all over it!!
289

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 20:51:01
Suomi (317): "many of which are now full members of the EU and have greater representation than Scotland whicxh is deperately struggling to prevernt a reduction in its number of MEP's"

It's certainly true that the EU applies a rate of roughly 3 MEPs/million for smaller countries, but 1-1.5 MEPs/million for larger countries (it's roughly 1.3 MEPs/million for the UK). Thus smaller countries do indeed have better representation -- Scotland would presumably have some 14 MEPs if an independent member. On the other hand, there is some irritation with small country representation in the EU. Some German politicians are arguing for the proportion to be the same for all countries, so that Germany would increase to some 240 MEPs, whilst England would (if independent) have something in the range of 180 MEPs.
290

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 20:52:46
Edward (293): "That is such a lame example"

All that matters is that it is a valid counterexample: the sources of wealth after independence are irrelevant. Perhaps you should revise fundamental logic.
291

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 20:52:55
324 fed that was a sexist comment :) some women like football i can take it or leave it.

292

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 20:53:39
fairfax fed thinks you are a big woman..............

:)
293

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 20:54:38
anyway fairfax would you like my scone recipe?
294

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 20:57:49
#327 Not sexist - just tongue firmly in cheek . .
295

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 14/05/2008 21:09:35
Dear Fairfax,while it is obvious that an independent Scotland would have more MEP's and greater influence in Europe,that is not my point.It is unfortunate that you selectively focused on one sentence that was not needed to make my argument.

I was suggesting that Wendy Alexander was using familiar unionist tacticts as a cover to conceal her real reasons for wanting an earlier referendum on Scottish independence.The familiar tactic is to suggest that any change is likely to forment chaos and uncertainty.The Consservatives used that tactic during two referendums on Develution.Interesting that Annabel Goldie is now one of the biggest supporters of devolution.I predict that when devoluton max and independence happens,we will find that Annabel and Wendy are staunch supporters.All I am asking is that Wendy is honest about her motives.
296

karinxxx,

14/05/2008 21:17:38
330 fed maybe that is what wendy is doing removing her tongue from her cheek. Although i think she would be better removing the cheek from her tongue.
297

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 21:27:30
Suomi (331): "It is unfortunate that you selectively focused on one sentence that was not needed to make my argument."

Of course, I agree that it is not your main point, but my decision to concentrate on your obvious support for the increased representation is not a trivial one. The undemocratic representation of MEPs in the EU is, I believe, a future argument for the member states. After all, the emphasis on Scotland's increasing representation, from some 1.3 MEPs/million to 3 MEPs/million, emphasizes the poor representation of larger EU nations. It's time for all voters to be equally weighted.
298

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 21:47:53
#328 He's not a big woman - just an old granny . . .

;)

(with apologies to any old grannies out there)
299

Conan the Librarian™,

14/05/2008 21:50:29
323
Semantics I think.
The United Kingdoms of Scotland and England viewed as seperate states "united"?
Or
The United Kingdom of Scotland and England, united under one monarch?

I personally would rather have a Republic of Scotland, so if England would like to go and unite with itself, I would have no problem with that.
300

Phillip,

14/05/2008 21:57:14
Oh so much silliness in one day.

First off, Wendy Alexander and Gordon Brown have managed to do the impossible. Their terrifying display of political gymnastics over the past week has actually managed to make themselves look less intelligent than George Bush. Until this time hardly anyone in the world would have believed it possible to be less intelligent than Bush.

Second, all this going on about who gets what name and who gets what seat and where. What a bunch of silly nonsense.

It seems rather obvious that in terms of UN membership, the English will retain the seat on the Security Council simply because the longstanding alliance between Washington & Westminster will not allow for any other option. Full UN membership is a completely different question. While Westminster may be able to wield an oversized amount of authority on the Security Council, that ability is completely absent in the UN General Assembly. Even the United States & Russia are at the mercy of the vast numbers of smaller states in the General Assembly. Since most of those states are former colonies, the idea of another people trying to pry themselves out from under English oppression will probably be most enthusiastically received. UN membership seems absolutely assured, no matter what Westminster desires.

As for the name, since the Treaty of Union which created the United Kingdom was between the Kingdoms of Scotland & England, by default the dissolution of that union will result in the reemergence of both the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England. Now, if the parliament in Westminster decides that it wants to continue calling itself the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland it will be completely within its rights. It may not make the most geographic sense, but it would be legal. To give another example, the people of Macedonia are completely within their rights to call their nation the Republic of Macedonia. However, the Greeks are also perfectly withi
301

Phillip,

Continued! 14/05/2008 22:01:53
However, the Greeks are also perfectly within their rights to refuse to recognize them by that name. So if, for some reason, the Kingdom of Scotland does not wish to recognize England as the United Kingdom, then it would have to and could simply refer to the United Kingdom as England. However the question of name is absolutely trivial.

When it comes to EU membership, the absolutely honest answer is that no one really knows what will happen. However, in truth the EU is not in the best interests of Scotland. EU membership could just as easily force monetary policies upon Scotland that would be just as disastrous as those of Thatcher's back in the 80s. EU membership would also surely block a resurgence of the Scottish fishing industry.

With its vast proven oil reserves, the new discovered oil fields, and the potential for even more reserves to be discovered, Scotland would be in a much better position if it remained economically independent and instead joined OPEC. OPEC is not exclusively a middle eastern club and would fit Scotland's economic future much more closely than the EU.

And why must a new Scottish currency be known as the Scottish Pound? Once again, it is the legal right of an independent state to name its currency as it sees fit, just as it can name itself as it sees fit. I personally would prefer a unit of currency that is more distinctly Scottish. Why not go with "Scottish Thistle?" Or Scotland could be like many South American states and name their currency after a hero of the struggle for independence. You could well find yourself one day quoting petrol at 5 Salmonds per Litre! Seriously though, the issue of names really is useless since both the nation and the currency could be named whatever the nation sees fit.

302

Phillip,

14/05/2008 22:02:57
Oh, and allow me to point out that when it came to the UN there was another important fact that was most certainly taken into account. During the founding of the UN, the USSR initially demanded that the main USSR seat & the seat on the Security Council be given to the Russian Soviet Socialist Republic, and that all of the other smaller SSRs in the USSR get their own General Assembly seat. It really was just a ploy to try to get more leverage in the General Assembly and it was eventually defeated (partially because the US brought up the point that by such logic each of the 50 states should receive their own place in the General Assembly while the District of Columbia would hold the Security Council seat, thus far outnumbering the Soviet contribution). However, that attempt by the Soviets did make it perfectly clear that the actual core state was Russia, and the rest had more in common with colonial territories than equal members of the union.

Oddly enough, the English claim to retain the Security Council Seat and the EU membership will only highlight the fact that they truly do view the Scottish People as a subject people and not as equal partners of the Union!!!!!
303

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 22:20:50
Philip - much that I would prefer an independent Scottish Currency in an independent scotland, it is not going to happen unless the SNP change theri pro-euro policy or the SSP get elected.
304

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 22:22:11
Phillip (337): "And why must a new Scottish currency be known as the Scottish Pound?"

As you rightly point out, its name is arbitrary. However, the Pound Scots was Scotland's currency for almost 500 years, until Union in 1707, so it seems a natural candidate.

"Oddly enough, the English claim to retain the Security Council Seat and the EU membership will only highlight the fact that they truly do view the Scottish People as a subject people and not as equal partners of the Union!!!!!"

Scotland is not an equal partner in the Union in that sense: the 1707 Union was not a federal Union, but one in which every MP has an equal vote. A Union in which Scotland and England were equal partners would be one in which every Scots vote would be worth 10 English ones.

"However, that attempt by the Soviets did make it perfectly clear that the actual core state was Russia"

This is true, but merely supports my earlier argument: the dominant sub-nation became the natural successor state.
305

Yankee girl,

USA 14/05/2008 22:24:36
Hello Karin and Conan! Fascinating days in Scottish politics!
306

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 22:34:07
Conan (335): "Semantics I think."

Agreed. My original point was merely an argument that England would be the default successor state to the UK, which Edward interpreted as claiming that England would retain the title "UK". I then became distracted by the possibility of the name referring to England's original Anglo-Saxon constituent kingdoms, admittedly an historical conceit . . .
307

Conan the Librarian™,

14/05/2008 22:34:38
341
Hi Yankee girl, yes indeed.
As a neutral observer, what do you make of wee Wendy's u turn on her u turn?
308

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

14/05/2008 22:37:31
#343 It's driving her round the bend . . .
309

Conan the Librarian™,

14/05/2008 22:43:16
342
Aye well, if having (more)nukes is the rule for becoming a successor state i.e. having a seat on the UN Security Council...where are the nukes based?;-)
310

Truely English,

14/05/2008 22:47:23
It was sad watching a good Scottish Football team losing to a Russian team tonight. Maybe if Rangers were part of the English League they would do much better and win.

Scotland seems to need a stronger Football league and the English Football League may just be what is needed.

Rangers have a very strong need to not only show they are British but also to display this forcefully.
311

Conan the Librarian™,

14/05/2008 22:51:31
346
LOL Truely.I'm sure they are doing this as we speak!
312

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 23:20:34
Conan (345): "Aye well, if having (more)nukes is the rule for becoming a successor state i.e. having a seat on the UN Security Council...where are the nukes based?;-)"

In England's submarines, using nuclear warheads constructed in Aldermaston. The submarines will have to be based in Plymouth whether Scotland attains independence or not, of course, given obvious Scottish opposition to their continued presence at Rosyth.

313

Fairfax,

14/05/2008 23:22:07
Fairfax (348): "Rosyth" should, of course, be Faslane.
314

Conan the Librarian™,

14/05/2008 23:43:29
348
My point Fairfax.
Where the submarines are armed and set out on patrol is the "enduser", no?...AND that would stay in Faslane till independence, would it not?
Unless of course the "British" State decided to remove the nuke base from Faslane.
By that fact they would be conceding that Scottish Independence was inevitable...
315

Yankee girl,

USA 14/05/2008 23:51:39
343 - Conan, I'm still trying to figure it all out! It sounds like it was against her will, but I could be mis-reading things.
316

snecked,

Argyll 15/05/2008 00:31:54
Truely English. Your patronising remarks about Scottish Football are not acceptable.
To date Scotland has won three European Soccer Trophies and been finalists eight times. No other nation of Scotland's size can come anywhere near that record. Infact that is a better record than most European nations. Perhaps you believe that all ther teams defeated in European games this year should play in the English Legue as this will make them better or do you only reserve your patronising remarks for Scots. It was intersting to note that the majority of Rangers players tonight were actually Scots.
When Celtic became the first British Team to win the European Cup all their players came from within thirty miles from Glasgow.
I wonder what the ratio is in the top "English" teams. I seem to remember Arsenal for instance contesting the European Cup last year with no English players whatsoever.
317

Fairfax,

15/05/2008 07:55:08
Conan (350): "Unless of course the "British" State decided to remove the nuke base from Faslane."

I think that's likely in any case, given opposition to nuclear technology in Scotland.

"By that fact they would be conceding that Scottish Independence was inevitable..."

For me, that conclusion is an added bonus.
318

Vote UKIP in the 2009 EU elections!,

15/05/2008 21:55:33
Let's stop discussing the EU as if it's something good. I find it highly offensive. Do you people not understand what we are facing? Can't you see the parallels with Germany in 1933? Wake up before it's too late.
319

livilion,

livingston 18/05/2008 01:16:35
#353 Fairfax
The problem with basing Trident in English home waters is finding two ports with secure deep water access far enough from each other to accomodate the missile fuel blast zone between the boats and the ammunition dump yet be close enough to a population centre to service the base.
Of course by English they might just also consider a Welsh port.

Where they're based is immaterial anyway, the actual missiles delivering the British independent nuclear deterrent is rented from and serviced by the US Navy.
Anybody ever read about Suez? If the US don't fancy us launching our independent nuclear deterrent, guess what? We won't launch our independent nuclear deterrent.
If they ok the launch the chances are that their own warheads will be detonating over their targets before or boats have even received their orders.

Britain's supposedly independent nuclear deterrent was introduced for the benefit of UK Foreign ministers, to be able to P as high as their US counterparts after being snubbed at post war conferences and he-haw to do with the 'Red Menace' or international terrorism.

BTW if our proposed new Trident boats these days are about defeating international terrorism where do we aim the warheads?
Asama bin Laden's home town in Saudi Arabia, or Tehran, or perhaps somewhere on the Iraq/Pakistan border where he might be hiding?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.