Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Wednesday, 14th May 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Break up - break down



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

Peter Swain (Letters, 26 April), asks if I "really believe" that warship and other defence orders will be lost to Scotland in the event of a break-up of the UK. Yes, I do.
When the latest round of contracts were awarded, shipyards and unions in other parts of the UK accused the government of favouritism in pandering to the Scottish lobby of MPs. Not only do I believe future orders would be lost, and bids from Scottish yards not even considered, existing orders would be re-routed to other UK yards. It is not scaremongering to say that any future UK government minus Scotland would be failing in its duty if it awarded defence contracts to a foreign country. It is simple common sense.

The same would apply to existing defence establishments in Scotland, which employ many thousands of people.

Mr Swain should be aware that the rest of the UK, Europe and the world do not share his narrow Scottish nationalist view and that they will all somehow dance to the SNP's tune once the United Kingdom has been destroyed.

ALEXANDER McKAY, New Cut Rigg, Edinburgh





The full article contains 192 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 27 March 2008 8:34 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Keren, It's time,

28/03/2008 02:00:51
Silly wee man.

Silly wee letter.
2

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 28/03/2008 06:37:54
Is my memory at fault, or is a substantial part of the aircraft carrier contract not going to France?

3

Rudi Hucker,

Uddingston 28/03/2008 06:41:08
Dr Wilkie, it's worse than that. New ships are going to be built by BAe, but they're going to get the work done in Korea.
4

Hugo of Garven,

28/03/2008 07:53:11
" . . would be failing in its duty if it awarded defence contracts to a foreign country."

So does buying Trident make the USA part of Britain or Britain part of the USA?
5

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 28/03/2008 08:45:33
The MoD failure to complete the small order for the replacement of the ageing Nimrod reconaissance aircraft fleet, and delay in commencing the building of two new aircraft carriers are just further examples of the UK's decline.

How on earth will the UK be able to maintain the same level of Defence spending in 10 years time? According to the Royal United Services Institute for Defence Studies the UK will require an annual 5 percent growth in GDP to fund increases in Defence spending!

In stark contrast, every 3 years the US Department of Defense expends multi-million dollars more on the National Guard(Territorial Army) and Air National Guard than the whole of the UK's annual defence budget!
6

Neil,

Glasgow 28/03/2008 10:27:51
Of course, where there was a competitive bid from an English contractor an English government would choose that over a foreign one. The same, in reverse, would apply to the Scottish navy indeed I suspect even if Portsmouth produced the better bid President Salmond would come under pressure to build our aircraft carrier in Scotland.

Only an idiot would suggest otherwise.
7

Mari M,

Edinburgh 28/03/2008 10:43:07
I am sure Neil must mean rowing boat, not aircraft carrier for ''President Salmond's navy'', or at best a wee second hand fishery protection vessel!
Only an idiot could think otherwise.
8

G,

dundy 28/03/2008 12:34:01
You can always tell when a letter makes a point that the SNPites cannot deal with!!!
Keren pops up and insults the writer .....
9

bill-alba,

Fife 28/03/2008 12:52:25
G. Another point would be that we have already lost a significant amount of work to English yards over the years regardless of whether we are in a union or not...
I wouldn't want independence for our country to be held back to keep 14,000 people employed for a year or two our shipbuilding industry should be trying to get work building all types of ships not just 2 carriers, but that is probably to simplistic for your union at any cost comments.
10

G,

dundy 28/03/2008 15:30:13
Bill-alba - you've got me all wrong - I'm unionist by habit not by doctrine - in fact I am exactly the sort of person that you SNPites have to win over to get a workable majority and have a hope of gaining independence..but at the moment I don't see the SNP gov making a better job of government than the previous lot and I certainly don't see any reason to start believing that indepedence will benefit me, mine or Scotland..
The sort of blanket condemnation of anyone who suggests that SNP and independence does not equal beeter for Scotland also will not convince, neither will bleating about "Unionist press" or blaming evrything on Westminster whilst making a pigs ear out of the budget....
11

Enigma,

28/03/2008 17:44:41
The Scottish Government already favours Scottish yards over their English counterparts so why on earth should not an independent English Government do likewise?
12

Keren, It's time,

28/03/2008 17:56:08
It's pork barrel politics of the worst kind - vote for me or you'll lose your job.

Pathetic.

 

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.