Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Scott: Bring curtain down on 'independence pantomime'

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: 16 March 2009
LIBERAL Democrat leader Tavish Scott yesterday demanded that the "independence panto" should end and politicians concentrate on getting Scotland out of the recession.
In his first speech to the Scottish Liberal Democrats as party leader, Mr Scott claimed there should be just three priorities – "jobs, jobs and jobs."

He told delegates in Perth that any discussion of referendums on independence should be put aside until the crisis was over – and attacked Labour and the SNP for allowing the constitutional arguments of "North versus South" to get in the way of what was important to ordinary people.

Mr Scott branded Labour's Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy and SNP First Minister Alex Salmond the "Itchy and Scratchy" of Scottish politics, and pointed to the fact that unemployment in Scotland was outstripping the rest of the UK.

To Mr Salmond and the SNP, he added: "You cannot waste taxpayers' money, government time and parliamentary debates on a cause that the country doesn't want and the economy can't bear. Ditch the referendum. Forget the spin and politics of the independence panto. Put the needs of Scotland before the interests of the SNP."

His speech was criticised by opponents as being "policy light," but Mr Scott hailed the controversial deal he struck with the SNP in the second round of budget negotiations earlier this year, after the original budget was voted down.

"We got the Scottish Government to change its mind and to adopt our economic rescue plan," he said. "The plan will boost jobs now and build for the long term."

Mr Scott also used his keynote address to voice concern about a loss of values in society. His first target was "greedy" bankers who brought down the economy, as he reminded delegates of fictional financier Gordon Gekko, played by Michael Douglas, who said: "Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works."

Mr Scott added: "It should have been a warning, a fiction, a parody, but a few greedy bankers took it as an instruction." Mr Scott then turned on social problems and parents who neglect their children.

Having thanked delegates for their good wishes over his forthcoming child due in July, he praised UK leader Nick Clegg for putting his family and new baby before coming to Perth and raised the issue of toddler Brandon Muir's death in Dundee.

"No government can be indifferent to a 23-month-old boy left by his mother at a drug-crazed party, sick and dying, while she works the street as a prostitute to earn money, not for that small life but to feed her heroin habit," he said. "Thousands of young Scottish children grow up in drug-fuelled families. We need to do better."

And he added his voice to calls for more children to be removed from their parents. He said: "We need a Scotland where those children are given a new beginning. A drug-fuelled start to life is no start. That must change."

ETHICS VOTE

A REVOLUTION in medical ethics was voted for at the Liberal Democrat conference yesterday after delegates ignored the pleas of party leaders and experts.

Delegates in Perth backed a motion calling for the introduction of presumed consent for organ donation where people have to opt out of being donors rather than opt in. They also backed a review of blood transfusion services to potentially lift the ban on men who have gay sex from giving blood.

The motion on organ donation was backed despite objections by party health spokesman Ross Finney and Holyrood chief whip Mike Rumbles.

On blood they also ignored Tim Brett, former Director of Health Protection Scotland, who told them: "We have to acknowledge that there is a potential risk from the gay community."


Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 15 March 2009 10:54 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Liberal Democrats
 
1

Fifi la Bonbon,

16/03/2009 00:43:10
If Jim Murphy MP and Alex Salmond MP are Itchy and Scratchy, does that make Tavish Whatsisname Poochie?
2

Edward,

16/03/2009 00:53:56
So speaks Widow Twanky Tavish!
What a creep
3

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 16/03/2009 01:14:46
If there is a panto in town - it's the Lib Dem spring conference.

Lets look at one of their policy 'positions', if you can call it that, om min. alcohol unit prices.

UK Leader Nick Clegg supports it.
Scottish Lib Dem Health spokesman Ross Finnie is open to it
Tavish Scott is against
And the party itself is still 'thinking' about it.

Another clear position from the Lib Dems, but don't worry, all their positions will probably change again tommorow.
4

Brian Hill,

16/03/2009 01:41:18
#6 Thomas79."If there is a panto in town - it's the Lib Dem spring conference."

You took the words right off my keyboard Thomas.

There they were, MPs, MSPs and party officials trying desperately to make the 75% empty hall look full.

11% in the first ballot of the Dundee Council by election on Thursday speaking as if they were contenders for the next Scottish Government.

If the Lib Dems only realised it they have the chance to reverse the 1922 Liberal collapse in favour of the emerging Labour (in the true sense of the word) Party in England.

Concentrate on that in England and representing themselves as a radical left of centre LIBERAL party (drop all this centre right Dem nonsense which was designed for middle England) ready to challenge the SNP in an Independent Scotland and they could have a real future in Scotland and England.

Keep going they way you are and there is every possibility you will be fighting for second place with the Greens and a revived Labour Party in England and the Greens and a revived left of centre SCOTTISH Labour Party in an Independent Scotland.

In short, go with the Historical/Political flow, don't try and make it dance to your tune or you will get swamped.
5

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 01:53:57

No politician has the right to stifle any cry for debate, to demean it, to distract it, to condemn it, or to take it over.

No one.

They cannot justify any subversive action taken against voters on the basis few wish to have the debate, or only those with whom they are ideologically opposed ask for a hearing, or it's economically not the right time, a ubiquitous excuse likely to be exploited on all occasions.

What Tavish and other ineffectual, two-bit, mean-spirited, Tamany Hall politicians aim to do is quell our outrage, divert our means of remedy and rights, a legitimate expression of the electorate that must, should, be given full and proper democratic expression.

Nor dare they ignore the issue, turn their backs on it as Gordon Brown turned his on new of an SNP elected government.

The crush it at their peril for they are not elected to rule, but rather to SERVE ALL VOTERS, not only those they deem molded in their likeness.

All democrats should be on their guard for sneering charlatans proclaiming democracy can be rationed in small, safe doses.
6

redcliffe62,

16/03/2009 02:02:59
gordon brown's policy to make scotland subservient after screwing the "scottish" bannks appears to be working, at least at a red rosette level.
it is a clever tack, expensive of course as it cost a lot of jobs, but brown is nothing if not thoroughly manic.
the fact that tavish agrees with that sentiment as well suggests that the libs will become an irrelevance as the 4th party in scotland, with the tories at least being in double figures. plenty of lost deposits methinks for the libs next time round.
7

Good debator,

16/03/2009 02:04:23
How can a so called democrat refuse the people a vote just because no one wants it? I want it and I know at least 6 other people who want it.

So if everyone knows 6 people who want it and there are approx 900,000 who want it then that is over the whole population of Scotland want it. (6*900,000 = 5,400,000)

How can he argue with that?
8

Moonraker007,

16/03/2009 02:37:15
Tavish Scotts the back end of the Pantomime Donkey. The man couldnae decide on whats right even if the Labour party told him in their usual memo.
9

Moonraker007,

16/03/2009 02:39:01
"No politician has the right to stifle any cry for debate, to demean it, to distract it, to condemn it, or to take it over.

No one."

SPOT ON!

A debate of this nature should be about conscience and not about gerrymandering or forcing your view against the will of the majority who wish a chance to decide.
10

Billiam Wallace,

16/03/2009 02:46:36
Dave "Mad Dog" Maddox strikes again with an eye-catching scurrilous headline that bashes the SNP but which does not bear close scrutiny as the speaker of the quoted line is about as relevant to Scotland's future as Robert Mugabe.

When Are they going to realise that they are running the Hootsmon into the ground, change tack and start supporting the peoples' choice for government and thus save the company from closure?

Watch Diomhair and see why the unionists are running scared of independence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saqQnj0LKlQ

Saor Alba

V for Vendetta
11

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 03:00:34
Scott Tavish probably fell asleep writing his speech.

Which would explain his constant referral to the auto-cue located in the upper part of the sparsely occupied hall.

The content of his speech and his cringingly wooden monotone delivery must have had all those Lords and Sirs who make up the Lib Dem hierarchy scratching their heads in bewilderment.

Is this the best individual they can find to put up against Alex Salmond?

No contest!
12

Julian.,

edinburgh 16/03/2009 04:50:20
#14,

Yes, but makes you wonder where the SNP will be once Salmond is gone. Maybe he's brought them to their high watermark and it will be downhill when another John Swinney takes over.
13

,

16/03/2009 05:10:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
14

,

16/03/2009 05:24:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

Letters From Muscat,

edinburgh 16/03/2009 05:51:06
No I think the Scottish people should have the debate, AND the referendum. There are lots of questions which should be addressed. And I want to hear them being discussed, to the point, not a load of waffle. But when did politicians not waffle? In your dreams Muscat. We live in interesting times. Remember, he who ask question looks fool for five minutes, He who does not ask question remains fool forever.
16

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 16/03/2009 06:15:27
I don't whether it's Wee Tavish that's Schitzo or The Hootsman.

Didn't we have a headline yesterday that Wee Tavish doesn't rule out a referendum??

I think that the "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs" soundbite is just a bit to close to "Education, Education, Education" - and guess what? Scotland's DFM was Wee Nicol at the time.

"You cannot waste taxpayers' money, government time and parliamentary debates on a cause that the country doesn't want and the economy can't bear."

And the LibDem inspired Calman Commission has cost £500,000+ so far, and it's conclusions - "WELL, WE DON'T KNOW". Now THERE is wasted money.

Isn't it strange that LibDems are in support of a commission that ignores public opinion, and are against a Referendum that tests public opinion?
17

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

16/03/2009 07:44:11
at the weekend it was being reported that the liberals were thinking about supporting a referendum. That could just have been inaccurate reporting (what-in the Scotsman?!) or it could be libs flip flopping again.
Whichever, it would be a brilliant tactic for them if they were at least to keep the door open on this one. It would undermine labour position and gain them serious leverage with the SNP Government.
18

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

16/03/2009 07:45:10
#20 Perhaps it's a pledge to create 3 jobs?
19

Number 6,

Germany 16/03/2009 08:00:47
The sheer arrogance of this jumped up little "Pressure group" takes the breath away.

As if they are in any way relevant.Dottering old Campbell was embarresing enough without this clot
compounding their problems.

What a joke.
20

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 08:11:01
Just seen a bit of Tavish Scott's speech to a half empty conference hall on the news this morning.
Not even his own party is willing to turn up to hear him.
21

donald anderson it's me,

glasgow 16/03/2009 08:14:11
The can always call on their Onionist Alliance Peers to set fire to the curtings.
22

walter,

16/03/2009 08:54:30
It matters not, in 2 years there will be a Scottish parliament with 129 SNP MSPs as we all know that they are the only party that put the people of Scotland first and the electorate fully back all they say.
23

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 16/03/2009 09:09:09
"The Scottish people do not want independence"

"OH YES THEY DO!"

"OH NO THEY DON'T!"

"OH YES THEY DO!"
24

Doh,

16/03/2009 09:14:08

Pity the article didnt also mention Tavish's outright opposition to ID Cards - a rather illiberal measure.

But thanks goodness the Liberal Democrats campaigned against the SNP Forrestry Sell-Off.

Another SNP mistake and u-turn.


25

Queen D,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 09:21:17
I am tired of the media backing any and every opposition party with regards the referendum on independence.

SNP says 2010, I am willing to wait.

The Labour party and the Liberal party chunter on about independence/referendums/SNP,bout time they chuntered on about THEIR policies.

Actually, no it is'nt they have had their shot at governing the people of Scotland and have been found wanting.
26

Number 6,

Germany 16/03/2009 09:22:34
#28 The SNP were never intending a "Forrestry Sell-Off, it was a lease agreement. Is there nothing the unionista movement can get right?

The leasing would only have been a mistake if they had gone ahead with it.

Get it ........?
27

Doh,

16/03/2009 09:45:37
#30

The SNP proposed Forestry "Lease-Off" was oppossed by the Liberal Democrats and others.

That is the beauty of parliamentary democracy - the SNP were persuaded from making such a mistake by the oppossition.

Another reason to vote Lib Dem.

Get it?
28

AJM,

16/03/2009 09:49:15
#30 Number 6
You are right it was a lease. However as they withdraw it because it was a vote looser in rural areas, the SNP got it wrong. Got it....?

The mistake was to propose it in the first place. Another proposal another u turn.

But as opposition parties are repeating the "Put the needs of Scotland before the interests of the SNP" line it is starting to have some effect. As it does not attack AS who is popular but the SNP as a party which is becoming less popular.
29

Alan B,

16/03/2009 09:59:22
There is an obvious flaw in the lib dems argument to put the economy and jobs first. The scottish parliament does not have the powers over the economy devolved.

The lib dems might want most of these powers to be devolved but labour with the exception of wendy does not.

It would help therefore if they were abit more honest and said unless labour devolve more powers to the scottish parliament starting with fiscal autonomy there is little the scottish parliament and scottish government can do to address scotlands poor economic growth.

And given the sheer mess Brown has made of the economic fundamentals we are pretty well donald ducked anyway.
30

Queen D,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 10:00:41
And do you think that selling off the Met Office and forestry in England will be a vote loser for the Labour Government in England?
Mind you I don't think they need a " vote loser" in England I think the English are ready to take action.
31

AJM,

16/03/2009 10:10:26
#34 Queen D and off course the importance of forestry on England to rural jobs is the same as Scotland?

Are you saying that the SNP should follow everything the Labour party does in England?

Do not agree with it wherever it is suggested, privatision has gone too far.
32

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 10:23:56
Re: the forestry question. Is it now a unionist tactic to attack the SNP for something that they DIDN'T DO. FFS catch a grip unionists.
33

Doh,

16/03/2009 10:24:01
#33 Alan,

The lack of powers is why the 2p tax cut proposal has been dropped - another example of multi-party parliamentary democracy in action.

I think it has dawned on Tavish etc that the Scottish parliament does not have the freedom of movement to adjust taxes and barrow money. That is why there is much more emphasis in getting more powers.

The LibDems believe the best and most likely way of getting more powers is via consensus with the other parties in the Calman Commission.

I think that route is more likely to succeed than a referendum on independence which in my opinion would be lost - thus setting back the cause of home rules by 20 years. Is that honest enough for you?
BTW you dont have to agree with it - for it to honest.

Anyway thank goodness the LibDem stopped the SNP from "leasing-off" our forests to the private sector.
Even the Tories didnt do that.
34

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 10:24:08

Menzies Campbell, Tavish Scott, Gordon Brown, David Cameron - what is it about those who deny Scotland independence regained that they should all have ethnically correct names?

Do they think it adds veracity to their perverse view?


35

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 10:27:12
37 Dream on pal, the SNP rejected the forestry proposal, not your mob.
36

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 10:28:24
"Anyway thank goodness the LibDem stopped the SNP from "leasing-off" our forests to the private sector. Even the Tories didnt do that." (Doh)

Alas, they did - they sold large tracts of aforestation to investors, many celebrities among them, and each sale with a handsome tax break.

37

Doh,

16/03/2009 10:28:32
#38

You are deluded. The LibDems campaigned against the SNP privatisation of Scottish Forests and got a lot of support. The SNP saw that and bottled it.

Another SNP mistake and another SNP u-turn.
38

,

16/03/2009 10:29:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
39

AJM,

16/03/2009 10:30:15
#38 LA whats perverse are demands from a minority believing they should inflict something on the majority because the minority believe in it.
40

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 10:30:57
41 Jackanory time from the Lib Dems. There was a proposal, it was discussed, and rejected. By the SNP, you may have noticed a debate on here as well as other places. Your party weren't mentioned.
41

Good debator,

16/03/2009 10:31:48
How can the Liberal Democrats ever win when I support independence? It doesn't make sense.

Don't you know Tavish Scott is a joke and that there were only 48 people in Dundee which Scores less than Edinburgh on a scrabble board.

You know independence makes sense, there is no argument. It's time!
42

Good debator,

16/03/2009 10:34:40
44 Observer

Observer is totally right, if what the Liberal Democrats had to say wasn't even considered then it has had all the consideration it needs.

The SNP mob which I love just shouts everything down, so he he shouts loudest is always right, what more proof do you want.

Maybe you support the illegal war? It's time.
43

Doh,

16/03/2009 10:35:16
#44

Thats funny. There were petitions and lobbying against the SNP privatisation policies - I guess your problem is that you cant see out of your SNP bubble.

You have blind faith.

But the SNP were wrong, they were oppossed and the policy has been dropped - another SNP mistake and another SNP u-turn.
44

AJM,

16/03/2009 10:35:42
#39 Observer, ho you Nats are loosing the plot, how can the SNP reject their own proposal, drop it, u turn, climb down, vote looser recinded, are more accurate descriptions of their actions.

#42 Jwil it is an old accusation that the Libs are all over the place. That crown will shortly be taken by the SNP with their yo-yo approach to proposals as a government.
45

AJM,

16/03/2009 10:38:21
#46 Good Debator, clearly noticed that this thread is showing up the SNP and doing a good job, so as with all threads where this is about to happen, play the Iraq card.
46

Good debator,

16/03/2009 10:40:34
49 AJM

The share price of this rag is falling, perhaps you support the illegal extraction of false data by torture?

You clearly are Labour. What more proof do you want of SNP goodness? Nuclear bombs? Don't make me laugh.
47

TWC,

Ex Labour 16/03/2009 10:47:27
For the life of me I can't understand the Libdems. How will they drive their Fiscal powers idea if not through a referendum?
The figures say Independence will get a NO so why didn't they ask for the referendum with the third option??
I want that referendum and the third option but if we don't get that it will have to be Independence
48

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 10:47:30
"Whats perverse are demands from a minority believing they should inflict something on the majority." (AJM)

You deny history. Invariably change is brought about by individuals not by those in power. The independence movement has been denied expression for decades. Only now has it been given free exporession, and even then within artificial constraints imposed by Westminster and the media.

Those who wish it are Scots or live in Scotland. They are not an alien sect. It is a movement from the ground up, not imposed, Thatcher-like, from the top down. You make the classic error of assuming people who want independence again want it for no real reason.

Mark this well: The status quo no longer exists - why else did opposition parties seek to patronise the clamour for change by establishing the Calman Commission?
49

Alan B,

16/03/2009 10:47:45
#Doh

My point was more, while I support Scott's focus on the economy, I think it does not ring true when he tried to disassociate it with constitutional reform.

Unless these powers are devolved there is little scotland can do via the scottish parliament. We are dependent on the uk government to deal with economic issues and from experience of the last 30 odd yrs with both the tories and labour they will not deal with our economic issues. Getting elected is what matters and scotland matters little.

I did not support the 2p tax cut as i would prefer a tax cut in corporation tax. I think in the global economy scotland needs to match and compete with ireland etc. I believe corporation taxes are more likely to have a better positive long term impact on the economy. Problem is we have waited so long that other european countries are following ireland and we are still in some timewarp.

But it is other taxation aswell. Look what happened afew yrs ago with filming of braveheart and rob roy. They went to ireland because we did not match there tax and investment regimes. And despite all the spin from labour about addressing the issue we got nothing.

Look at flight duty. The tories and labour have used it as a cash cow. However scotland needed more direct flights tax hardly encourages that.

In the global economy we need to niche ourselves and react quickly to changing situations. We dont and cant.

In other areas we had not control over competition policy meaning we could not split glas and edin airports if we wanted. We could not control the shape of our banks. Personally i would have like to block the halifax takeover of bos. But we could not even if we wanted. We could not even decide whether to have a super casino or not to promote that type of tourism.

Like the lib dems i strongly believe that the euro would be better for scotland economically. While it would be better if the whole uk joined it is not going to happen. Scotland should at the very le
50

Arfur,

16/03/2009 10:49:21
I am fed up of these F..ing politicians saying that a referendum is not needed because independence is not wanted by the people of Scotland. How the shipping t*ts do you know. This is just a pathetic answer to a question they are scared off.
51

Alan B,

16/03/2009 10:50:06
..least be able to have an indepdendent assessment of the merits of the euro.

The lib dems really have to stop being so tentative and hope that labour fall into line with more powers and focus more strongly on the importance to scotland of these powers and how to achieve them. So far labour has taken them for a ride.
52

Alan B,

16/03/2009 11:09:03
#Doh

"The LibDems believe the best and most likely way of getting more powers is via consensus with the other parties in the Calman Commission."

Calman was fine when Wendy was leading scottish labour as she supported more powers and then question was which ones and not the principle. Since then brown has squashed this process.

I think the lib dems would be better almost playing the snp and labour off against one another. They also need to be clearer about what exactly they want. ie support full fiscal autonomy rather than fudging the issue so that they can compromise with labour. Scott used the majority of a basket of taxation in a tv interview i heard. It is too much like kennedy said give yourself wriggle room.

To the snp the lib dems should try to make a deal over dev max with fiscal autonomy. Try to get the snp to do a deal over more powers for the sp first. With a promise to support a referendum at some future date. Refusing to support a referendum on independence is not sustainable and loses the lib dems the moral high ground. That may appeal to the snp who would see it as a step in the right direction and would help the lib dems achieve their desired outcome and would remove many of the reasons for independence.

To labour they should make it clear that they will not consider a future coalition unless labour support considerable more powers for the scottish parliament and also do not use westminster to block lit.





53

Doh,

16/03/2009 11:27:09
#57 Alan

You make a lot of good points - difficult for me to respond to them all during my tea break! I post some more at lunch.

Your point abour cuts in corporation tax beign better than cuts in personal taxation - I am not so sure the latter puts oney in the pockets of consumers which we hope would lead to more demand.

But maybe you are right - the old joke about 10 economists having 11 opinions is so very true.

As for Calman - teh great thing about living in a democracy is that it will report - positions will be taken - and people can vote accordingly at the next election.

The idea that a party oppossed to seperation *must* support a referendum is peculiar.

If people really want a referendum they should vote SNP - Tavish did say that when interviewed at the weekend. How that is illiberal or undemocratic beats me. The only people that go on about a referendum are the SNP activists.


But you are right that oppossition to a referendum definately sours relationships between the SNP and teh LibDems - it is noticable that the relationship is less hostile at the local government level.

Perhaps that is because the councillors are more interested in better governance than in psoturing to their own activists about a referendum that probably wont happen - and if it does will probably fail.

How would that help the cause of home rule ?

54

Number 6,

Germany 16/03/2009 11:28:31
The fact remains that just as in south britain, the Fib dems are a directionless irrelevance.

Scotts pompous stupidity demonstrates everything that is wrong with this political shambles. How dare he state no one in Scotland wants a referendum.

That alone will cost him support he may have picked up from defecting Labourites.
55

AJM,

16/03/2009 11:28:33
#57 Alan B, I agree with what you say about the Libs playing one off against the other. However it does mean they have to have wriggle room and they have to keep the other side guessing so they cannot be clearer at this stage about what they want.

I think that if the polls show large support for a referendum it will happen at some stage, but we are not there yet, and support for independence may well slip for the next few years. The large support for the moment is against an unpopular Labour admin, that will change.
56

AJM,

16/03/2009 11:32:43
#59 Number 6 I suspect the fact that you care enough to comment on what he said, SNP supporters usually ignore the Libs, makes the point against what you are saying their irrelevance.

What aout defecting SNP supporers where are they going to go? There are there for the taking as support for the party declines.
57

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 11:34:30
"The LibDems believe the best and most likely way of getting more powers is via consensus with the other parties in the Calman Commission." (Doh)

Tavish Scott is maneuvering position toward a coalition with the SNP. Call it what you like - late-in-the-day, enlightened self-interest, putting Scotland first - it doesn't matter so long as Scotland is given wise and stable government these next economically troubled years.

Take one aspect alone, our topography.

Geographically, Scotland has greater needs, unique, far different to England; Scottish domiciled politicians must shift their gaze away from a metropolitan mindset, to free themselves from a culturally seperate series of issues and problems germaine to middle-England.

Their focus has to be on Scotland, from top to bottom, become imaginative, exercise political insight and energy to make better use of our land and shoreline.

That alone requires them to shrug off the unrepresentative dead weight that is old politics - Westminster. Only when the electorate perceive they have done that will voters feel their needs, their ligitimate aspirations are given genuine, serious attention, and remedies promised will become solutions instituted.
58

Doh,

16/03/2009 11:36:34
#50 Number 6

You really are stupid.

If you read the article Scott says "teh country doesnt want a referendum" - by which he means,in his opinion, the *majority* dont want a referendum.

If people want a referendum they are free to vote SNP.
They didnt do that in sufficient number to get their way. End of story - perhaps you would be aware of that if you actually lived here rather than in Germany.

Then you would be aware that for several months the SNP were planning to privatise teh Scottish forests and that was met by outcry in rural area - and firm oppossition by the Liberal Democrats.

Thanks for giving us such an easy issue to mobilise support against the out-of-touch SNP.
59

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 11:37:18
" Mr Scott claimed there should be just three priorities – "jobs, jobs and jobs.""

Thats only one thing and the lack of jobs is allways a problem even before the resseison.

The biggist problem with this statment is it metions the problem 3 times and gives no stratages on how to create jobs, they can't be magiced out of thin air.

The orgasations who empolyee people need the finachel resourses to employ.

There needs to be a vacancy or gap that needs to filled.

There needs be ideas. Saying it 3 times is only highlighting a problem and sovles nothing.

You have to kep the people who become unempolyed on a high i.e. take precusion to stop them from become to depresed and down on their prospects of finding work.

These people need support to find work. Few Job centre staff have the right skills to help people who face unemployment.

Stop employers form creating application forms and interveiws which are more difficult than the job it's for. The amount of jobs that disrition sounds easy it min wage or bit more and the application form is as complicated as better paid higher skilled job.
60

Doh,

16/03/2009 11:41:18
#59 Number 6 !!!!!

You really are stupid.

If you read the article Scott says "teh country doesnt want a referendum" - by which he means,in his opinion, the *majority* dont want a referendum.

If people want a referendum they are free to vote SNP.
They didnt do that in sufficient number to get their way. End of story - perhaps you would be aware of that if you actually lived here rather than in Germany.

Then you would be aware that for several months the SNP were planning to privatise teh Scottish forests and that was met by outcry in rural area - and firm oppossition by the Liberal Democrats.

Thanks for giving us such an easy issue to mobilise support against the out-of-touch SNP.
61

St.George,

16/03/2009 11:45:02
Here's a thought eve,tell salmond to stop saying one thing then doing another!
62

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 11:52:19
"The out-of-touch SNP." (Doh)

No such political party exists.

To deny they represent a genuine point of view is to act the novice of whom Ming Campbell is so derisory.

Unionists who claim they care about Scotland's interest must prove how far they will move to meet the criteria of political change offered under independence, the changes which make a nation mature, which help its people develop to the full. Merely to say independence is anathema is not enough.

It is the duty of opposition MPs to state what more they can and wish to do to bring about greater self-government, greater self-reliance, for the people of Scotland, and at what point they can offer no more, thus allowing the electorate to make an informed decision as to what they feel is missing, or if enough, that full independence is not required.

Constitutional change is already happening.

For a politician only to harp on and on and on about blocking the movement for independence is to portray themself as reactionary, twenty years out of date.

Voters look to them for a new fresh vision, for leadership, not for curmudgeonly temper.
63

Doh,

16/03/2009 11:54:01
#64 Eve

"Jobs, jobs, jobs" - is obviously a soundbite - teh policies were discussed as the conference - and are a little more detailed.

1. First of all - we were proposing tax cuts to encourage consumer spending, so increasing demand and so hoopefully employment.

2. re-starting government spending, even if by PFI, the SNP have stalled school construction by introduing their PFI-by-any-other-name scheme.

BTW there is no certainty that the SFT will be cheaper than the later PFI schemes - it is just a blind faith.

3. Review government spending - obviously ID cards are a waste of money - but at the Scottish level - free school meals for rich children does seem extravagent in these cash-strapped times.
This money could be spent on creating "green-collar" jobs in energy production and recycling.

4. Education and re-training - money must be found to maintain or increase spending on these areas - the 2.5% cut in VAT would have been better spent on this.

Hope that helps.
64

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 11:55:54


"Tell Salmond to stop saying one thing then doing another!" (St George)

If only Blair has done that over Iraq.

If only he had said he had a special relationship with Bush and duly jettisoned the worst president the people of the USA have had in their lifetime. If only he has saved countless lives, and countless misery.

If only.

65

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 16/03/2009 11:58:07
A referendum in the current climate is simply un-winnable. There is no getting away from that as a fact.
66

Number 6,

Germany 16/03/2009 12:00:54
65 Doh,

At no stage were the SNP ever planning to "Privatise Scotland's Forests".

Stop lying.
67

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 12:00:58
"He told delegates in Perth that any discussion of referendums on independence should be put aside until the crisis was over –"

What crisis?? Would that be the resseion!!! Apparently these thigs happen every so often. They'll be better times again, sometime in the future. These harder time challenge people more and if you have potencial and the correct level of suport then some thing amazing can come out of all this doom and gloom. Or would Mr Scott rather we just sat on our **** and played with our fingure whille we heard the words that jobs are priorties, with no ideas on how to create jobs.

Is there no always a crisis going on in the world?
If we go by Mr Scotts logic we'll never get our voice on the constuntion of Scotland heard.

Personaly I feel an independent Scotland would have more jobs. You only need to list the jobs the English do for us at the moment to realse that in an independent Scotland we would need people to carry out that work.
68

Alan B,

16/03/2009 12:04:13
The point about a referendum to me is that all parties now seem to support a referendum to deal with constitutional issues eg eu, euro, devolution etc. The tories under thatcher were against them out of principle and believe that parliament should decide all issues.

As such if you support in principle a referendum to decide constitutional issues and as such support the right for the public to choose directly on a single issue it makes little sense to reject it becuase you make do not agree with what the people may decide.

Surely it is better to put the issue to the people, let them choose and then put the issue to bed. Democracy is surely after all the will of the people.

What we have seen from labour and the tories particuarly with europe is an abuse of referendum to use them just to support there own position and for political expediency.

No matter the outcomes it is important we all back democracy.

I can understand the lib dems taking a position that a lost independence referendum would set back more powers for the scottish parliament. As such it makes sense for them to push a deal with the snp where they will both work towards dev max and then allow an independence referendum at a later date and campaign for the union.

My own position on referendum is that I would like alot more like the US where single questions can be attached to elections and allow the people more direct democracy over specific issues.

69

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 12:04:40
"A referendum in the current climate is simply un-winnable. There is no getting away from that."
(Mikko)

You might well be right but that is no reason to deny one. The act should not be one of serving a politician's ambitions but of giving full expression to the view of the electorate, and in so doing, be in a btter position to assess the potency of that view.
70

Number 6,

Germany 16/03/2009 12:04:54
61# AJM I would comment If I knew what on earth that post is supposed to mean.
71

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 12:07:42
"Relevance, bozo?" (sm753)

If you did not have the impertinence of a street waif, the ignorance of a door stop, and the moniker of a busticket, I might be moved to consider your remarks sane.
72

Doh,

16/03/2009 12:10:28
#67 LA
"To deny they represent a genuine point of view is to act the novice of whom Ming Campbell is so derisory.


Who is denying the SNP exisit? They do.
Whis denying the SNP do not have a valid a point of view? They do.

Who is denying that the SNP were planing to lease-off Scotlands forests on long-term renewable leases (so possibly in perpetuity, Scotlands forests? Number 6 - he is in denial.

Did the SNP plan to privatise Scotlands Forests invalidate their desire for seperation. No.

Was it a bad policy and has been abandonded? Yes.

Did it meet with oppossition from the Liberal Democrats?
Yes.
73

Alan B,

16/03/2009 12:12:43
#74 was meant for Doh.

Also my support for a corporation tax cut would be to try to tackle and address our long term slow economic growth. The 2p tax cut prosposal was a short term proposal to address the economic slump as such they are aimed at 2 different things.

I am not convinced by a demand stimulus via a tax cut due to the dreadful mess brown has made of the uk finances. In scotland without borrowing powers it would have to be associated with a 2p cut worth of government spending and hence reduce demand in other areas.

I am not sure the best way to deal with browns economic catastrophe becuase the mess is so bad. It would be have been far easier to adhere to the economic fundamentals like not spending more than you have coming in taxes, controlling the growth of credit, controlling house price inflation etc and ensuring the banking system was stable.

As such i would not go for a demand boost throught fiscal means. The quantative easing the brown has now implemented is probably the best way but should have been done 6 months earlier. Just like interest rates should have been cut 6months before they were.
74

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 12:12:55
I can never understand people like Tavish Scott who think their country isn't fit to run itself. I find such a lack of self confidence rather sad.
75

The Master,

16/03/2009 12:13:08
According to the Sunday Times yesterday, half of all Scots would oppose separation if there were a vote tomorrow.
The electorate is more sophisticated than the Nats give them credit for and largely accept that it is pure pantomime to hold a separation referendum at a time of such economic turbulence. Supernat is hoping that the referendum will be voted down and that he can come out with the usual chippy nonsense about denying the will of the Scottish people, but it just won't wash!

The mainstream parties should emphasise that there is a vote on separation each time elections are held for Westminster and Holyrood: if voters want to express their views in favour of separation, they only have to give the Nats outright majorities of seats!
76

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 12:15:30

"Was it a bad policy and has been abandonded? Yes." (Doh)

The first part is your view, the second appears to be fact, so I'm uncertain what it is that you seek to prove.

At times of severe economic stringency there will be many more kites flown and then wound in when the breeze is too weak to carry the idea, especially when promoted by a minority government.

Would the opposition parties do less if in government? Here's a good idea? What? NO money available? Okay. Here's another one.

No one has been harmed.

Pity they didn't launch their kite into the opposition's hot air.



77

St.George,

16/03/2009 12:17:07
69. You haven't got a clue! I was talking to a Iraqi student recently,he had just arrived in England to attend university, he told me and i quote: "all those who have never lived in Iraq and criticize the British army are talking rubbish,I can not thank them enough,they have brought some kind of normality to my country,at least now my mother can go about her work
without fear of intimidation".
It's about time twits like you gave our troops some support.
78

The Dark Side,

16/03/2009 12:17:13
#78 smee: no, I'd recommend doing it as little as possible; means you get a real lift off when you get together with the bird, no what I mean!
79

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 12:19:30
#68 Doh: No it fall short of giving people who have allready found them selfs unempolyed the support they need.

How do these people access this training and education. In pertiular if like many people who have lost jobs in the banking industry for example (it's had heavy job losses and there evedence to suggest that they will lose more.) have already done a degree, in bussiness for example, only graduated between 1 and 5 years perviousley. You suggest that these people should re-train.

Surely there is a great risk with re-training that your are constanly re-training the same people over and over again but in a diffrent subject it's just not exceptable for these people who are involed and in the money spent.

So how do you decide who retrains in what?
Is it the indivdauls choice?
Are they just radomly pop in somewhere?
is it done by testing peoples abilties and streghts?
Or is it a mixture of all of the above, if so what mix would they use?
80

Los Angeles,

16/03/2009 12:19:43

"According to the Sunday Times yesterday, half of all Scots would oppose separation if there were a vote tomorrow. The electorate is more sophisticated than the Nats give them credit for."
(The Master)

So, you are saying half the electorate is dumb, the other half read the Sunday Times.

I would have thought the half reading the Sunday Times ill-informed.
81

AJM,

16/03/2009 12:20:30
#81 Urban, so you belong to the out of EC camp of the SNP? So do you struggle to understand the SNP pro EC stance. We are in more than one Union.
82

Doh,

16/03/2009 12:20:36
#83

> Was it a bad policy and has been abandonded? Yes." > (Doh)

> The first part is your view, the second appears to
> be fact, so I'm uncertain what it is that you seek
> to prove.

I am making the assumption that the SNP also feel that this was a bad policy - that is why they have abandoned it, surely?

As for governments flying kites - of course - my very original post said that was beauty of parliamentary democract - an ideas - can be raised - discussed - even oppossed by oppossition parties and then rejected.

That sounds pretty good to me - far better than the one-party state that some posters seem to prefer - was it number 6 who said it was proposed, discussed and rejected by the SNP alone? Is he nuts?
83

St.George,

16/03/2009 12:22:30
72. We do those jobs Eve because scotland doesn;t have people who can!
84

Doh,

16/03/2009 12:24:07
#87 Eve

You are right - times are hard - and there are no easy solutions - I look to our politicians to discuss and debate ways and means of making improvements especially to those who lose their livihoods.

I too have been redundant in the past, it is not pleasant.

That is why I would rather our politicians and parliament focused on the recession rather than secession.

To me people matter more than boundaries on a map.
85

The Dark Side,

16/03/2009 12:28:25
#94 smee: you after a rent?
86

ochone,

sauchie, clacks 16/03/2009 12:31:11
Understandble really, as Tavish is obviously getting confused by it all, especially as to where he and his party stand.
87

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 12:32:56
#90, I've got no problem with a country's freely choosing to belong to an association of sovereign nations like the EU.
88

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 12:35:11
#88 Los Angeles: I was unaware that many people in Scotland read the Sunday times.

I would have thought that the most read sunday news paper was the Sunday version of the Daily Record. I can't remeber the name, possible cause I don't read it BUT I would reconise it if I saw it.

Nor do I read the Sunday time, I bought it once and wasn't really all that impressed, the lay out was a bit of a mangle like most news papers. I prefer the Sunday Hearld layout, I can see why they say it's award wining. It's the clearst and easist news paper to read.
89

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 12:38:05
47/48 and the troll. You really need to stop telling lies. I do sympathise with you, because you are obviously all out of arguments, but in the absence of having anything positive to say making things up isn't really acceptable.
90

Doh,

16/03/2009 12:42:54
#80 Alan

Dont really disgaree with what you are saying here.

As I said I think the 2p tax cut - was not feasible without the SP having more powers to raise other taxes or borrowing. Hence the short-term need for more powers for the SP.

But also long term looking to a federal solution - with fiscal autonomy - which for want of a better definition means that the SP raises the taxes to cover its expenditure.

Perhaps unlike the SNP (I dont know) I also believe that local authorities should also raise the taxes that they spend, but where they are just implementing government policy that would be funded by the SP.

Devolution, subsiduarity, empowerment of all levels of government and the individual. Unfortunately, in my opionion the SNP have demonstrated more centralising tendancies - for example their nationally set local income tax.

You may have noticed that the SNP have also dropped LIT - despite it being a prominent election promise.
Very disappointing.
91

Number 6,

Germany 16/03/2009 12:45:09
91 Doh, ref your quote :

That sounds pretty good to me - far better than the one-party state that some posters seem to prefer - was it number 6 who said it was proposed, discussed and rejected by the SNP alone? Is he nuts?

No it was not me you complete and utter imbecile.
Do you have the same handler as Vincent? You seem suddenly obsessed, just like him, with every word I do and in this case don't post.

The pair of you need to stop making fools of yourselfs,
or at least insist your handler has his posts proof read to prevent your further public humiliation.
92

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 12:49:39
102 - 91 is the guy who is nuts. He thinks that the Liberal Democrats single handedly reversed the forestry proposal. He apparently lives in another universe and didn't notice the clamour from SNP supporters stating very clearly they were opposed to the proposal(not policy) so it was hardly surprising when it ws dropped.

It's a bizarre argument, criticising the SNP for something that they didn't do.
93

The Dark Side,

16/03/2009 12:50:44
#98 smee: I have contacts in the business,whats your taste exactly
94

Doh,

16/03/2009 12:56:05
# 103 Observer

I not time did I say the Liberal Democrats single handedly stopped the SNP plan to privatise Scottish forests.

I did say the Lib Dems oppossed the SNP plan to privatise Scotlands forests.

I did also say that this was a demonstration of a functionaling parliamentary democracy.

You seem to prefer a one-party state - all issues can be discussed and resolved within the SNP - is that what you think?

Pity the SNP dropped their election promise on LIT.
I supported that.
95

The Master,

16/03/2009 12:58:19
#99 Eve: I think you'll find that the Sunday Times is a common read amongst the ABC1 demographic and that it has an impressive amount of Scottish news and comment. It's far superior to Scotland on Sunday (which is lacking in any real news) and the Sunday Herald's a Weegie paper.

You should read Jenny Hjul: she's got her finger on the pulse in Scotland.
96

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 13:07:19
106 Au contraire, the Sunday Herald is not just a weegie paper (although it is a Tory free zone, thank God) it is an award winning paper which is universally acknowledged to have the best journalism in the land. A tad more impressive than the Sunday Times which is read by people who think getting an Aga for the kitchen is the pinnacle of achievement.
97

Doh,

16/03/2009 13:10:23
#106

The Sunday Times is terrible. Murdoch has taken it to the bottom of the market.

Great fashion section usually some arful titilation.

Penetrating poltical coverage - all written by right wing hacks - including Jenny Hjul - who thinks balance is something to do with Wii Fitness.
98

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 13:10:28
105 You have been trying to paint the SNP as having done a U turn and dropping the forestry proposal as a result of pressure from outwith. I see it otherwise. It was never a policy in the first place for ''Parliamentry democracy'' to consider. BTW what is democratic about ganging up with Labour and the Tories to state that you will oppose a bill which has not even been tabled yet which your mob did a few weeks ago. Democratic ?
99

Doh,

16/03/2009 13:14:35
#109 Observer

Okay let me clarify that a bit.

The SNP are developing a less than democratcic habit of suppressing parliamentary debate - by confining the discussion of public policy to thier own party.

No wonder you think referendums are more important than elections.

BTW I really dont understand the SNP's synthetic outrage about a referendum.

We have elections every 4 years - people can vote SNP and get a referendum if they want it. I call that democracy.

100

,

16/03/2009 13:14:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
101

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 13:17:00
#106 The Master: The lay out is rubbish on their website too. Not very reader friendly. All thoes picture down the right hand side it's more desrating than the Scotsmans adverts that do dances, to destract you from what your reading.

I find that hard to belive when I know what the layout of the Sunday Times looks like and it's just not reader friendly. It has far too much information in one page, everything is all squished in.

The Sunday Hearld has a reader friendy layout cause there is only 2-3 stories on each page. Whats wrong with weegie papers, that isn't wrong with all over news papers in this misfortune of a union?
102

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 13:18:39
110 It was never a policy in the first place Doh, that's the point I'm making. It's a poor show to pretend it was. I don't think there is anything synthetic about the outrage caused by the unionists decision to suppress the referendum bill without argument or debate. It will come back to haunt you all.
103

Tris,

16/03/2009 13:21:15
I see that, after a couple of days of the tv showing rows of empty seats, the Libs bussed in a party for the "leader's" speech. Why they must have filled half a dozen rows.

A pile of pap from a party that sold its soul to Labour for a ministerial car.
104

The Master,

16/03/2009 13:23:51
#112 Eve: I agree with you about the site: I usually read a hard copy.

The problem with newspapers in Scotland is that there all basically "regional", however much they profess to be Scotland wide. This is not the case in England, but the proliferation of "regional" rather than "national" titles is common in many countries.

I think a lot of the decline of the Scotsman is due to its being essentially an Edinburgh paper which is losing its crucial ABC1 readership to London titles with strong Scottish editions, such as the Times.
105

European Scot,

16/03/2009 13:24:00
82 The Master

" According to the Sunday Times yesterday, half of all Scots would oppose separation if there were a vote tomorrow."

You will of course be able to furnish us all with the actual questions asked.
The term incidentally is independence, not separation.
Most people around the free world have obviously shown a very positive attitude towards the term independence. Unionists prefer to use the more negative sounding word 'separation, it's not so positive, having all those associations with break-up and divorce etc. Much better to use a word with more negative spin.
Only a referendum will give a clear answer to the Scots wishes on independence, assuming such a referendum is carefully monitored by the EU and the UN.
Unlike you, I have neither belief, nor trust, in a British State and its 'organisational' abilities.

" The mainstream parties should emphasise that there is a vote on separation each time elections are held for Westminster and Holyrood: if voters want to express their views in favour of separation, they only have to give the Nats outright majorities of seats!"

Voting in elections is based on Party loyalty, and in no way indicates support, or not for independence. There are supporters for Independence in all of the Parties.
Only a Referendum, assuming it to be fairly run, will give the answer.
Strange that the Unionist Parties, so convinced of a 'No' vote, and you here with a Sunday Times poll suggesting 'half of all Scots would oppose separation if there were a vote tomorrow', seem rather reluctant to support a Referendum.
As you say, the electorate are more sophisticated, that's why Unionist Parties like the Lib-Dems are in real trouble over their stance on this question.
The Scots will have their rightful say, those who try and prevent that, will pay for it.
106

Teamdroid,

16/03/2009 13:41:37
"We got the Scottish Government to change its mind and to adopt our economic rescue plan," he said. "The plan will boost jobs now and build for the long term."

This is a truly breathtaking statement for Tavish Scott to make. Wasn't the central plank of that Lib Dem "economic rescue plan" a 2p income tax cut? You remember, the cut that was laughed at derisively by all the other parties and economic/political commentators? The cut that disappeared like snow off a dyke from Lib Dem policy, the moment they were asked what £800 million of public services they were going to cut to pay for it? Moreover, you know Scott will be condemning the Scottish Governments economic policy every day from here on, despite it being "our economic rescue plan".

A party of total chancers, and spineless to boot.
107

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 13:42:07
#115 The Master: The problem with news papers like the Scotman is more down to the fact that alot of the news is so negative and/or depersing. When your struggling with an aspect of your life .ie. the possiblity of job lose the last thing you want to do read and in some case lisen to negative news.

I think some happy news should be spread in front page of the News papers. I bet the sale would roket that day.

Also the price of some news papers have really went up. The Sunday Hearld is now £1.50. I'm sure that just last month it was 1.40 or was it a few months ago.

Master Do you really honsestly think that the class system still has any meaning in this day in age? Cause I think it's meaningless and these days is only used to discrimate or crate biasim.

Really what you are doing here is either under or over estamating people. When you view people under the class system.
108

Tris,

16/03/2009 14:01:06
#116. Like you, I wouldn't trust the UK authorities to run a referendum without some supervision from the UN or the EU. Both the major parties have sworn to do "anything" to stop the independence movement, and when recent revelations have proved that the UK is not above dirty tricks (not to mention torture).

I agree too that the emotive "separation" with its association with marriage break up and divorce is the wrong word. The correct word is Independence.....a positive word, but also a realistic description of the situation.

I hope that the wording of the question(s) is approved by the UN/EU and the conduct of the referendum is also overseen by them. (And not the United States... they have a vested interest in England continuing to merit a place on the Security Council and remaining supine.)
109

The Master,

16/03/2009 14:06:38
#118 Eve: "Master Do you really honsestly think that the class system still has any meaning in this day in age?"

Simple question: how many solicitors read the Daily Record/Sunday Mail? How many copies of the Record find their way into detached CT band H houses?

#116 European: I think it's right not to soft peddle "separation" by referring to it as "independence"; it's major (also unnecessary and probably hugely damaging) constitutional upheaval that the Nats are talking about here.

Britain is a representative democracy and referendums are very much the exception rather than the norm: nothing inherently undemocratic about that, is there!

I don't have time just now to research full details of the Sunday Times poll: perhaps someone else can help out.
110

Cheradenine,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 14:10:23
#110 How refreshing, someone on this site who understands how representative democracy is meant to work!
111

Doh,

16/03/2009 14:12:45
#113 Observer

I think you are trying to be a bit too cute - or have developed a very thin skin.

If you look at my earlier posts I did say SNP "plan", "proposal" etc.

The point is the Lib Dems oppossed this plan.

Thus demonstarting the benefits of a multi-party parliament and democracy.

You are also ignoring the fact that the SNP have dropped LIT - an election promise. Disappointing.

You are not going to tell me that wasnt a policy either are you.

Lets face it - parties make mistakes - even the SNP.

As for 117 - he is dead right the LibDem proposal for a 2p tax cut - by your definition that was never a policy just a proposal - "kite-flying" - was also a mistake. Cart before the horse.
The SP needs more powers before such a policy would be practicable.

#114 Tris,

FYI the conference was as well attended as any previous Lib Dem conference - the problem was that they had booked an 800 seater venue - despite the fact there are only about 300 delegates.

No wonder it looked half empty. It was.

No one was bused in, they all came by trams.


112

Otis B. Driftwood,

Abroad 16/03/2009 14:13:34
If it's not known for sure whether most people want an independence referendum, why not have a referendum referendum.
113

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 14:18:47
#120 The Master:
"Simple question: how many solicitors read the Daily Record/Sunday Mail? How many copies of the Record find their way into detached CT band H houses?"

Simple question do you go through these peoples rubbish?

"how many solicitors read the Daily Record/Sunday Mail?" I wouldn't know, oddly it would be the last question on my mined if I was to go and vist a Solictor.
Possibley more than you think. Though I supose we can all asume that the likes of Tommy Sheridains solictor would read these types of new Paper.

"How many copies of the Record find their way into detached CT band H houses?" I wouldn't know, I don't stalk anyone, I don't go through anyones bins and I don't pirtularly ask people what papers they read. Also I don't stand at the new paper stand and ask them what their classificaiton is and what kind of house they live.
114

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 14:19:16
122 Apart from Mike Russell I don't know anyone who supported it Doh. Do you ? So the Lib Dems were on the winning side for once, it doesn't give them any moral authority. LIT has not been dropped, it's been posponed as the other parties made it quite clear they weren't going to support it. So it will be an election issue, along with the referendum. Suits me.
115

Darien,

Panama 16/03/2009 14:22:19
#120 The Master: "Britain is a representative democracy"

I suppose when Dave Boy gets the keys to No.10, but with zero Tory MPs elected in Scotland, that will also be representative of democracy? You really think he will have a democratic mandate to govern Scotland? Dream on!
116

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 14:25:01
#123 Otis B. Driftwood: Mmmm, I wonder if the Unionist would go for that one!!!!

Though I think we can safely assume that most Scots at least want the Scottish parlement to have more power. So why not have the referdum and have it ranked like the STV vote.

So it would possibly be the biggist waste of money ever, so maybe the likes of Gorden Brown will be up for that one!!!
117

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 14:29:44
#127 Buckpool Loon: Brilliantly put!!
118

Doh,

16/03/2009 14:34:46
# 125

Are you talking about LIT ? - I support it - I think most LibDems do.

As for Mike Russell - well if the foresty "thing" was his idea then I am sorry since I must admit I have met him and quite liked him. I have no idea why the SNP shafted him in 2003 - but maybe it was for ideas like that one.

I am glad that LIT has only been postponed - hopefully at the next election there will be a majority in the parliament for it.


119

Darien,

Panama 16/03/2009 14:36:00
#122 Doh: "they all came by trams"

Actually, there are no trams in Perth (are you local?). To be sure, Tavish and the FibDums (like their British Nationalist NewLab/Tory buddies) are big tram fans, as the public in Edinburgh now know to their long-term cost.

As for "democracy", see the post at #126.

FibDums - Return to your consituencies and prepare for oblivion.
120

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 14:41:29
131 I like Russell too, he is a very clever and amiable man. And he may have been well intentioned with the forestry proposal, but it smacked of privatisation and that is a definite no-no. I don't know anything about the internal politics of the SNP, I'm not a member.

It will be funny to watch Labour campaigning for retention of the Council tax at the next election, unless they can come up with a cunning plan in the meantime. I think Stephen Purcell has been floating some ideas, but I don't know the details.

121

Teamdroid,

16/03/2009 14:43:12
#122 - Are you seriously suggesting that Tavish was "kite-flying" when he was demanding a 2p tax cut as his price for the LDs supporting the Scottish Budget?

"Kite-flying" is not how I'd describe announcing at your party conference, a major demand for support on the single most important vote which takes place at Holyrood. It was more like cheap macho politics, and it blew back in the LDs faces. For the second year running, their influence on Scotland's economy ended up being precisely zero, when it could have been substantial. Even Labour got more out of it this time.

Face it, the 2p tax cut demand was a lame piece of policy (sorry, proposal - I know you politos love your semantics so much) presently very badly. It made your party look like idiots, and for Scott to subsequently claim any significant influence on the Scottish Budget is truly laughable.

122

The Master,

16/03/2009 14:46:22
#124 Eve: ""How many copies of the Record find their way into detached CT band H houses?" I wouldn't know, I don't stalk anyone"

Surely you must have friends and acquantacies, Eve! Have you not noticed that the different social classes don't tend to read the same print media?

Are you so ensconced in some (no doubt carefully constructed) world of your own that you can't tell a Scotsman Reader from a Record reader, or are you holed up in a some politically correct ivory tower?
123

Doh,

16/03/2009 14:49:33
#132 Panama

No trams in Perth ? Really?

Did the SNP stop them being built?

#134 Nope - I am saying what you are saying it was a mistake - cart before the horse - impractial.

Just like the SNP plans to privatise the forests.

That is why a like a multi-party democracy backed by a system of PR. A model still rejected by Labour and the Tories. Another good reason to vote LibDem.

124

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 14:51:23
135 What a snobby comment.
125

bill-alba,

Fife 16/03/2009 14:52:32
110 and response 121 by your methods and idea on enlighted view of how democracy is supposed to work then when we vote snp and have a majority there would be no need whatsoever with a referendum because if you vote snp you know exactly what you are voting for - Independence now that would be more than ok for me but I'm sure the wee treachourous british lab/lib/tory would be saying that its undemocratic not to have a referendum.
126

Westfield Bairns,

Falkirk 16/03/2009 14:57:21
The big question for the Lib Dems is, will they manage more seats than the Greens at the next Election, yep, tough one to call
127

Doh,

16/03/2009 15:04:51
# 138 Bill,

If the SNP fight an election on the basis they will make Scotladn independent - and no hold a referendum - that would be perfectly democratic.

It is the SNP that propose a referendum so that some people can give them their protest vote without commiting themselves to seperation from England.

If you were being a bit more critical - you would agree it is just a panto - with evil unionists thwarting the SNP from damaging themselves.

You want the referendum in 2010. I dont really want one at all so I am not a democrat. If I wanted one in 2020 would that make a half-democrat?

Laughable.

When the election comes people are free to vote SNP is they want - however it appears that the SNP activists dont think people should have the choice to vote LibDem - or if they do - they should have to do what the SNP say.

One day there will be trams in Panama.
128

European Scot,

16/03/2009 15:11:15
119 Tris

Yes I agree with you the wording of the referendum will be all important, and the British government should have no say in that.
This is for Scotland and the Scots to decide upon, and having a genuinely neutral question set would be fairer to all.
Westminster is not the place to look for neutral questions, and you are probably right about the USA, and that vested interest in having 'England' on the Security council.
I would prefer to see the EU assisting, and watching over this one.
129

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 15:14:14
#135 The Master: Of Cousre I have friends and they read news papers occasionaly. But I don't go around asking people what News papers they read. It's not really all that improtant for me to know what news papers my friends read.

"Are you so ensconced in some (no doubt carefully constructed) world of your own that you can't tell a Scotsman Reader from a Record reader, or are you holed up in a some politically correct ivory tower?"

Hey theirs nothing wrong with being politically correct unless you go completly mad with it and lose all sence of purpose.

Though I must adimt, I'm very concerded about the Elephants etc. that may have been harmed in the building of your tower, there. ;)
130

Doh,

16/03/2009 15:31:59
From reading all the SNP postings above - let me summarise their position:

The SNP definition of democracy - you are free to vote for any party you want so long as they are in favour of a referendum.
131

Doh,

16/03/2009 15:40:46
#145

Do you agree with a referendum?
No.

Would you enter a coalition with the SNP?
It takes 2 to tango.

Should Scotland have greater fiscal autonomy?
Yes.

Do you think more powers should be sent back to Westminster from Holyrood?
No.

Do you think the SNP are bad people?
Yes they should have their organs removed to keep unionists alive.

Go on Doh give us one policy that was actually agreed by the chimps tea party at the weekend.....

Errr, their was the one about a federal UK with fiscal autonomy for the Scottish Parliament.

Also we should establish a one-party state with Alex Salmond elected president for life and all trees should be sold to the highest bidder.

132

European Scot,

16/03/2009 15:44:34
120 The Master

" I think it's right not to soft peddle "separation" by referring to it as "independence"; it's major (also unnecessary and probably hugely damaging) constitutional upheaval that the Nats are talking about here.

Unnecessary ?
Do you think the same term was used when India took its independence, and all of the other former colonies now enjoying their independence ?

" .... and probably hugely damaging ... "
To whom ?

As a Brit Nat, it might appear so, but that is from a 'British' perspective.
As a Scot, and in line with most of the independence supporting World, I would consider it the establishment of self determination for my country.
In fact in Scotland's case, the re-establishment of a Country and a Nation, which would never be classified as hugely damaging by anyone other than a Unionist, more intent on preserving an archaic United Kingdom, than considering Scotland's interests.
As for Britain being a 'representative democracy.'
Scotland doesn't vote in any significant numbers for Tories, yet after the next 'representative' General election, Scots will more than likely be controlled from Westminster by a Conservative government.
When Scotland doesn't vote for the Tories, and yet ends up being run by them, that makes a total mockery of being part of a 'representative democracy.'
133

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 15:45:11
#144 Doh: No one can infource anyone else what to support or vote for. All you can do is give them the facts and let them make up their own minds.

What do you classafy as an SNP posting out of curiousty?

Someone who supports idependence or someone who is a amember of the SNP!!!!
134

Alasdair Roy,

Aberdeen 16/03/2009 15:50:03
How badly we are served by our politicians in Scotland and how little respect they have for their country! Where else in the world would a political leader refer to the debate on the serious issue of national independence as a pantomime?
135

Darien,

Panama 16/03/2009 15:51:21
#146 Doh (or rather Duh): Like other British Nationalists I expect you consider yourself to be both British and Scottish (or English etc).

Question: British (nationality) and Scottish/English (what exactly?)

Do also comment on the democratic issue when Dave Boy does get into No.10 with zero Tory MP's in Scotland. Please refer to how the FibDum federal UK idea intends to remedy such outcomes in future, using examples as appropriate.
136

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 15:55:03
#149 Peter: Aye their right there, quicks turn around in politics ever that has to be. It will confuse everyone and reafurm to everyone that the Lib Dems don't know what they stand for.

Besides it's not for Travis Scott place, especaly when he's facalitive in the referndum debate.
137

Doh,

16/03/2009 15:55:10
#148 Eve

An SNP posting is one that repeats SNP dogma without any thought or reason.

For example

Apparantly you are not a democrat if you dont think we should a referendum. Why is that ? We have regular elections in Scotland and the people are free to vote SNP.

Why are the SNP delaying the referendum to 2010, can I ask for it to be delayed to 2020 or would that still not count as democratic?

Or let us say Scotland was independent would you say we should have referendums every 10 years to rejoin a union with England ? Or would that be unnecessary?
138

Ewan Randall,

16/03/2009 15:59:28
Should there not be some honesty with a first past the post referendum for independence with those who wish to take Scotland into independence bringing forward proposals for an interim Scottish constitution?
139

The Master,

16/03/2009 16:01:42
#126 Darien: " I suppose when Dave Boy gets the keys to No.10, but with zero Tory MPs elected in Scotland, that will also be representative of democracy? You really think he will have a democratic mandate to govern Scotland? Dream on!"

If the Tories were to receive no Scottish seats that would merely be a reflection of the FPTP Electoral System. They do have a presence in the SP, which would be derisory were elections held under the same system as is used nationally.

Weren't the Nats down to 2 Westminster seats at one point not all that many years ago, by the way!
140

Doh,

16/03/2009 16:02:37
# 152 Darien

I do regard myself as both Scottish and British.
I am not English.

A Tory government in Westminster would excercise the reserved powers and the Scottish government would continue to exercise the powers of the Scottish Parliament. What example do you want me to give?

Let me see if SNP had decided to privatise the Scottish Forests, England would not need to make the same mistake with their forests.



141

Shredder,

16/03/2009 16:07:19
#130 Eve: "#127 Buckpool Loon: Brilliantly put!!"

This is the Buckpool Loony we're talking about here, is it, or is this some kind of all too clever sarcastic jibe?
142

Gordon S.,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 16:10:40
When I read the article, I thought, ya whatever. So I thought I might get have a gander over some messages. The first thought that hit me was.. why are there "so few" messages? The answer that took all of a nano second to render itself was, this is the lib/dems, whom in the UK may have some regard, all but tiny. But here in Scotland they are indeed a mute point. I mean look at their policies, without independence they might as well roll on their backs and let westminster rub their tummies (like puppies) as westminster build nuclear stations and the like. Completely useless!
143

James.com,

16/03/2009 16:13:52
Why is Independence suddenly "Off" in a downturn? Are we so lacking in confidence? Would this slump have been worse on our own?
144

European Scot,

16/03/2009 16:27:17
144 Doh

" From reading all the SNP postings above - let me summarise their position:

The SNP definition of democracy - you are free to vote for any party you want so long as they are in favour of a referendum."

Is this what passes for Liberal Democrat thinking ?

The SNP believe all Scots should have a say in a referendum to choose the future of Scotland's constitution, and that means from all Parties, those in agreement with independence, and those against it.
How much more democratic does a Lib-Dem want it to be, and how does refusing to countenance a referendum stack up against it in the scale of democratic rights ?

154 Doh

" Why are the SNP delaying the referendum to 2010, can I ask for it to be delayed to 2020 or would that still not count as democratic?"

The SNP have clearly laid out their plans for a referendum, they haven't delayed anything, they are simply keeping to their agenda. Giving the people of Scotland sufficient time to judge their performance in government, and then putting a bill for a referendum before the Scottish Parliament in 2010 as promised. The only people trying to change a referendum timetable have been New Labour who, suddenly decided that a referendum was in order, and attempted to rush things forward, before the SNP had been in office for a reasonable term. Mr Gray now seems to have retreated from New Labour's enthusiasm for an earlier referendum, by refusing to consider one being held as was originally scheduled by the SNP.
Yet more democracy, Unionist style.
145

The Master,

16/03/2009 16:30:20
#138 bill: "110 and response 121 by your methods and idea on enlighted view of how democracy is supposed to work then when we vote snp and have a majority there would be no need whatsoever with a referendum"

Now you're putting words in my mouth. All I meant is that the Nats would have a good case to argue that Westminster should hold a referendum if the Nats obtained a majority of Scottish MPs.

An outright majority of Nats in the SP would enable them to hold that *rigged* "consultative" referendum of theirs (and a "yes" vote for that *consultative* "rigged" referendum question might similarly give the Nats a strong platform to argue that Westminster should pose a fair "separation: yes or no" type question.

#161 Spook: you touch that Beamer and kimba (the cat herself, not the troll named after her!) will be paying Maverick a visit lol
146

Darien,

Panama 16/03/2009 16:32:00
#157 Doh: "I do regard myself as both Scottish and British".

Well, my question was: "British (nationality) and Scottish(what exactly?)"

Take your time..........

You might also relate this to which of your two 'nationalities' takes precedence, though I should think for intelligent British Nationalists such as you (and The Master of course) that would seem rather obvious. Feel free to further elaborate on the implied dual 'nationality', preferably with reference to the universal definition of nationality.
147

Arthur G,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 16:36:53
Someone remind me, please, who is Tavish Scott?
148

Doh,

16/03/2009 16:38:08
#165 Darien

I am Scottish - that is my nationality.
I am also British - hence I have dual nationality.

Some people have dual nationality of two nations that do not form part of a union. What is your point?

The UK is a multi-nation state, that is the union of two nations.

Here is an analogy for you.
I am a husband and a father.
Which should take precedence?
149

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 16:39:00
#154 Doh: You don't know that their mebers of the SNP? So calling them SNP posting is a bit odd.

You might not feel like your being deind anything by not been allowed to have voice in a refredum for Scottish indpedence. But a supstanchal amount of Scots do feel that way and some older people still feel a bit hurt about the 1st refendum for develotuion.

Some of us fear that we'll never get a say.

2020 is far to far away 2010 is only next year and these 2/3 years have gaven us time to think things through properly get the best possible stratages and deals rather than rush things and end up with argumentive kaouse coming form all sides.
150

Doh,

16/03/2009 16:46:29
#162 Euro Scot

The SNP are keeping to their agenda by holding a referenda in 2010.

Are the LibDems not keeping to their agenda by not wishing to hold a referenda?

You say that 2010 allows people to judge the performace of the SNP government - well why should we wait even longer and judge the performance of a Scottish Parliament with greater powers within a federal UK.

I still dont get why being oppossed to a referendum is undemocratic. At the next election people are free to vote SNP.

It appears that SNP rhetoric implies that the LibDems (oh and also Labour and the Tories and Margo) are undemocratic for not supporting the SNP.

Why dont you get Aunty Annabell and your friends in the Tory party to support a referendum - why are the SNP activists so fascinated by the LibDem position?

151

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 16:48:16
#164 The Spook in Leith: Would that be the same hall that the SNP had over filling in to other rooms last year.

Or was that another place in Perth?
152

Doh,

ray me dont drink latte 16/03/2009 16:51:21
# 169 Eve

I know how you feel - sometimes I feel I will never get the chance to live in a federal UK.



153

Doh,

16/03/2009 16:53:03
# 173

Eat at Joes, one million flies cant be wrong.
154

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 16:54:51
#171 The Spook in Leith: Really, I though they had been watching American cartoons, when they came up with that name, no the Sound of Music.
155

Alan B,

16/03/2009 16:56:53
#Doh

re referenda

Do you think parliament or the people via a referendum should be the method of deciding big constitutional issues?

The problem with the lib dem position is they have generally been seen as the party that supports change through concent of the people via a referendum eg europe, euro etc.

Only having referendum when it suits does the lib dems no favours when it goes against the ideological basis of what the lib dems have supported.

Labour and the tories have moved onto lib dems positions and now support referenda for constitutional matters. But as we can see particularly over europe there use of it is more for political expendience.

Also why not support a referendum so that the issue can be decided one way or the other rather than having it dragging on. As said before having a referndum pushed back to ensure more powers for the sp first would be an understandable position.
156

Doh,

16/03/2009 17:01:00
#175 Peter

Tavish is against a referendum in this parliament.
That was his position in the last last election and it is an election promise being kept - get over it.

LibDems dont want to see disproporionate cuts in the Scottish Block grant. We are proposing that in future the SP raises the taxes that is spends - fiscal autonomy.

Yes the Liberals still support a federal UK - that was the major debate on the second day of the conference (the first day being on the economy).

PS. I disagree that Scotland would be better off outside the Union - if I did then perhaps I would also vote SNP.

PPS. Presumably once Scotland is independent (after all it is inevitable) I hope you will rejoin the Liberals!

157

Darien,

Panama 16/03/2009 17:03:23
#168 Doh: "I am Scottish - that is my nationality.
I am also British - hence I have dual nationality."

In point of fact, since 1707 there has been no such status as "Scottish Nationality". (If you doubt that, ask any foreign country if they recognise the Scottish nation). Yes, one can have say British and Canadian dual nationality - but that is precisely because these two nations exist as independent states. Scotland is quite different.

For the 'nations' of the UK there is only "British Nationality" and hence for "British Nationals" only the one nationality is possible - "British". In other words, Scottish nationality does not exist, so you cannot claim it (yet).

With all due respect, like most British Nationalists, you appear to be quite ignorant of the reality and your misguided belief and its implications for Scotland (as a nation, or rather as a non-nation as things stand). If you believe in a nation, you are a nationalist. If you believe in the British Nation, you are a British Nationalist, and by implication, anti-Scots, as the British nation (Treaty) only exists as long as Scotland remains a part of it.

Scotland requires independence if its people desire a Scottish Nationality. So if you really wish to enjoy "Scottish Nationality" you need to support an independent Scottish state. However if you wish to have "British Nationality", by implication you must support the continued suppression of a Scottish state.


158

Alan B,

16/03/2009 17:07:33
#Doh

"well why should we wait even longer and judge the performance of a Scottish Parliament with greater powers within a federal UK."

Firstly we already have a federal structure within the uk with central and regional parliaments.

The 2 issues are really
1)how England should be governed now we have devolution eg regionalised which it does not seem to want, an english parliament etc. But that is really up to england and to a large degree they are pretty happy being run from westminster as they dominate that parliament so much.

2)how much power is devolved to the scottish parliament and which powers should be reserved.

Also as a lib dem who is pro eu why would you know support scotland having a union with england as 2 individual members of a federal eu. I do not really understand the advantage of having a federal uk to then be a member of a federal eu.

Part of the problem i have with your vision of a federal uk is what powers should we share. A political union must be for a purpose. I just cannot see the a devolved uk being mature enough to allow scotland to join the euro while england decided to keep sterling.
159

Alan B,

16/03/2009 17:09:24
#Doh

"LibDems dont want to see disproporionate cuts in the Scottish Block grant. We are proposing that in future the SP raises the taxes that is spends - fiscal autonomy."

I would call that fiscal federalism. Fiscal autonomy to me is where scotland would raise all its own taxation and then give the federal uk government monies for shared services. Similar to the way the eu works.
160

Doh,

16/03/2009 17:09:30
# 179 Alan

In the past there have been referendums if all the parties agreed or if the parties themselves were split - for example over Europe.
The LibDems did not think a referendum was necessary to establish the Scottish Parliament since it was already agreed by all the major parties in Scottish Constitutional Convention.

The referendum is a red herring, a political panto.

A referendum will not settle the issue since the SNP only exist to create an independent Scotland.

However as I asked before if Scotland were independent do you think we should have regular referendums to re-establish the union?

161

Doh,

16/03/2009 17:13:23
# 185 Alan

Yes I would agree with your terminology, and just to be clear my understanding is that the LibDems support what you fiscal federalism rather than fiscal autonomy.

Although in our debate - sorry chimps tea party that was refered to as "full fiscal autonomy".


162

Alan B,

16/03/2009 17:14:45
# Spook

What the snp should do is put forward a bill to parliament for a refendum on fiscal autonomy.
163

Alan B,

16/03/2009 17:21:18
#Doh

I think any referendum should kill the issue for a while one way or the other. (part of the reason i would like to move to more powers for the sp first). But after a suitable time another referendum to join a uk union would be ok if there was still an issue.

Personally i support the use of referendums like in the US adding questions to elections to give the people a real say in running the country. It could be over nuclear use, smoking bans etc.

164

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 17:23:39
#174 > I know how you feel - sometimes I feel I will never get the chance to live in a federal UK.

And I don't think I'll ever get the chance to enjoy what most other people in the world take for granted - to be a citizen of my own country, to carry its passport and to join in electing its rulers.
165

Doh,

16/03/2009 17:24:09
# 184 Alan

The Steel Commision report is online if you are really interested. I dont know if the federal motion debated on Saturday is publically available I cant really be bothered typing it in.

As well as greater powers over taxation we also want borrowing powers.

But I think where the LibDems go further than the SNP is we believe more powers and taxation should be develoved to local government. Another good reason to vote LibDem.
166

Eve,

Scotland 16/03/2009 17:24:24
#187 The Spook in Leith: Aye but it is hurtful at times, Some people can be so cruel. I once told someone I was from Scotland to which the repleid "your Brittish" to which I was completly taken a back with. It felt like I was being labled with a stigma.

I think that only the lables that should attached to an indivdaul are the ones the choices.
167

European Scot,

16/03/2009 17:27:40
172 Doh

" You say that 2010 allows people to judge the performace of the SNP government - well why should we wait even longer and judge the performance of a Scottish Parliament with greater powers within a federal UK."

In percentage terms a large number of Scots, and that includes those for, and against, support a referendum, and by large number that means a majority.
No matter how dear to your heart, only a small minority of people would consider a federal arrangement.
A referendum settles the question of Independence, and things move on.
Denying a referendum in the face of a majority wishing to have one is somewhat undemocratic.

" It appears that SNP rhetoric implies that the LibDems (oh and also Labour and the Tories and Margo) are undemocratic for not supporting the SNP."

" Why dont you get Aunty Annabell and your friends in the Tory party to support a referendum - why are the SNP activists so fascinated by the LibDem position?"

This is not about supporting the wishes of the SNP, it's about supporting the wishes of the Scottish people, from the 'Yes' and the 'No' side.
The Lib-Dem name incorporates the word 'Democratic', that is why the SNP might be so fascinated with them.
Unfortunately the Lib-Dems seem to have forgotten the meaning of that word. and along with it their own history of supporting ' home rule.'
That has been replaced by presenting a combined front with 'Aunty Annabell' and 'friends in the Tory party', as well as fellow memory loss members of New Labour, more intent these days in defending a dying Union, than considering those aspects of 'home rule' for Scotland, which so drove their founding fathers.
168

Doh,

16/03/2009 17:29:15
# 189 Alan

Or - a referendum on Local Income Tax ?
Let the people decide, or it a that tabled for 2011?
You see the SNP panto on referendums is just that political panto.

Why hasnt the LIT referendum happened ?
It hasnt even been brought before the parliament!
Are you saying the SNP are undemocratic?

169

Alan B,

16/03/2009 17:33:29
#Doh

"The LibDems did not think a referendum was necessary to establish the Scottish Parliament since it was already agreed by all the major parties in Scottish Constitutional Convention."

Only 2 of the 4 major parties took part in the constituional convention. The tories did not want and did not implement devolution. The snp did not take part as they wanted the opion of independence on the table.

The problem if you do not have referendums going forward i would have thought is obvious.

If say the scottish parliament want more powers but westminster scottish mps do not. What should happen? What if both westminter scottish mps and sp want more powers for sp but westminster as a whole ie a future tory government does not. What should happen?

Changing the powers of the constitution based on parliament with a first past the post system means a minority government can implement what it wants.

How and who should decide if the scottish parliament should get more powers?

I personally think written into the scotland act should be the method by which powers can be transferred. ie 66% of the scottish parliament or a referendum etc.

Should westminster be able to withdraw powers given via a referendum?
170

Sanny,

16/03/2009 17:33:33
Why are the Unionist parties obsessing over calls for a referendum. Before the Holyrood election the SNP made it abundantly clear that if they were elected, they intended to call for a referendum towards the end of their first term of office. Nothing has changed within the nationalist movement since the SNP made that commitment. They have not changed their timetable nor have they even raised the question of a referendum.

It is the unionist parties who keep dragging up the referendum –should we have one? –should we not? –what should be the question? They just go on and on. Whereas the SNP having made their decision and happy to leave it there and press on with other matters. This approach, of course, gives lie to the claim that the SNP are a one policy party!

On a related but separate point it would seem some contributors do not appreciate that there are many people who whilst they support the demand for independence, nonetheless do not support the SNP. I indeed and one of these, in that I want an independent Scotland running its own affairs, but I do support it left of center party policy such as that proposed by the SNP. Post independence I would expect there to be representation of the full range of political opinion. Hopefully an independent Scottish parliament will be able to develop a more effective system of government found that currently displayed in Westminster.

171

Doh,

16/03/2009 17:35:45
#195 Euro

So you are saying that a party that supports regular elections held by PR is undemocratic?

If as you say a majority of people want a referendum then at the next election the SNP will get a majority and it will happen. I can live with that - I would call that democratic.

I fear you are right that a minority support federalism. I think the majority support watered-down devolution.
172

Alan B,

16/03/2009 17:46:21
#197 Doh

Yes i think a referendum question added to an election over something like lit would be a good idea. (as you will have seen i do not support lit)

I know none of the parties support referendums like that on important questions/issues beyond the constitutional. It is just I believe in direct democracy and probably a lack of faith in party politics. ie the disconnect between the people and the political parties.

There is also the big problem that msp vote along party line far too much and we really need to be more like the US with msps voting for what they think a individuals on issues and not following the westminster whip approach.

173

Doh,

16/03/2009 17:49:06
#204 and #205 Alan and Peter

I'll be back at 9pm .....
174

,

16/03/2009 17:51:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
175

Questions,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 17:54:41
I nearly agree with Scott, as soon as Scotland becomes independent there should be no more talk about independence.

We will then be free so the subject will be moot!
176

,

16/03/2009 17:59:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
177

The Master,

16/03/2009 18:04:35
#207 Democratic: where does this 80% support for a referendum come from?

On the basis of its new poll, the Sunday Times (published yesterday), stated that:- "In August 2007, 74% of Scots told YouGov they supported an independence referendum in principle. That has now fallen to 57%, with 29% opposed to the idea."
178

The Master,

16/03/2009 18:08:31
It gets worse for you Nats. Again according to yesterday's Sunday Times:-

" Only 32% believe it would be appropriate to stage the referendum next year in view of the recession, with 53% against. If a referendum were held tomorrow, 33% said they would support independence while 53% would oppose it."

This fair cheered me up when I was round at my friends' house, perusing their copy of that newspaper (while, coincidentally supping champers!)
179

,

16/03/2009 18:11:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
180

The Master,

16/03/2009 18:14:00
Just to rub it in, you Nats are on course to lose your status as biggest party in the SP. Again from the Sunday Times:-

"The poll of 1,380 adults last week put the SNP on 35% in the constituency vote, with Labour on 34%, but on the regional vote Labour is on 32% and the SNP 30%.
It would give Labour 49 seats (+3), the SNP 44 (-3), the Tories 18 (+1), Lib Dems 15 (-1) and Greens three (+1). "

This at a time when we have one of the most unpopular Labour government's in history in power nationally: talk about Nat ineptitude!

#212: a dwindling majority!
181

,

16/03/2009 18:16:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
182

,

16/03/2009 18:16:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
183

Miss H,

16/03/2009 18:19:02
213 One poll - which has not been published yet.

The date you need to put in your diary is June 4.

Those results will tell us what is going on.
184

The Master,

16/03/2009 18:27:49
#214 Democratic: " tell you what Master if you believe that why not have a no confidence vote and go to the people"

For the simple reason that most of the great unwashed out there don't welcome elections (particularly ones forced on them outwith the normal framework) and would be likely to punish Labour for that reason alone.
185

,

16/03/2009 18:31:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
186

,

16/03/2009 18:32:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
187

Miss H,

16/03/2009 18:32:52
218 Silly man. They could call a vote of no confidence at any time and have a grand unionist alliance - Labour/Tory/Lib Dems. No election is necessary.

As long as they refuse to do that we will continue to laugh. And if they did it we would laugh all the harder. First Minister Iaian Gray. Bring it on as someone once said.
188

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 18:39:00
''In August 2007, 74 % of Scots told YouGov they supported an independence referendum in principle. That has now fallen to 57%...''

That's pretty astonishing given the events that have occurred between Aug 07 and now. To be honest I would have thought the figure would have dropped lower. Economic turmoil does not make the best context for the independence case - at first sight. Especially with RBOS and HBOS either disappearing or being effectively nationalised. The fact that 57% of people polled still support a referendum indicates to me that these are not ''protest'' votes. These are people who have thought it through and are unlikely to be swayed.

As we go deeper into recession and see the election of the Etonians, I imagine that figure of 57% will rise rapidly.
189

The Master,

16/03/2009 18:39:37
#221 Mr H: silly woman! The Lib Dems have made it clear that they will only join coalition with the largest party in the SP and Labour are hardly going to tarnish themselves by joining with the Tories and having the "Tartan Tory" jibe against the Nats thrown back at them!
190

European Scot,

16/03/2009 18:49:13
210 The Master

"On the basis of its new poll, the Sunday Times (published yesterday), stated that:- "

' In August 2007, 74% of Scots told YouGov they supported an independence referendum in principle. That has now fallen to 57%, with 29% opposed to the idea.'

So the Sunday Times poll comes out with figures that do seem slightly at odds with actual trends, and with the way things are going politically.
The most interesting thing about polls is not so much the answers, but more the questions, and how they are set.
Asking a question for example like: In the light of the current financial crisis do you think it would be a good idea to have referendum ? That will achieve one set of results, because the person being asked the question, has been led down a certain path in order to achieve a set of results.
A straight, simple question like: Do you support a referendum ? That will likely give a different set of results.
In a British State, which wants to hear a certain kind of response in polls, and with Newspapers which give their full support to that State, you can be sure that the art of producing 'leading' questions has been honed to a fine art.
Having looked at past polls, and read the questions preceding the main question, in some cases over twenty of them, you can easily see how people are being guided along a certain route, which would make them more likely to give the required response.
It's a question of the questions, and how they are being 'framed', the people being asked them that is !
191

The Master,

16/03/2009 18:54:32
#222 Observer: the fact that there is majority support for a separation referendum is misleading.

How many of that 57% would still support it if the survey question made clear that the Nats will be using their rigged "consultative" question and that the question could be more meaningfully set by Westminster.

#224 European: good point and illustrative of how the Nats' "consultative" question would soon be discredited in the event of a "yes" vote.
192

,

16/03/2009 18:58:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
193

Iain's,

16/03/2009 18:59:45
Vote LIB DEM, vote Labour.

194

The Master,

16/03/2009 19:03:22
#226 Democratic: the Sunday Times were testing how Iain Gray's line that it is completely inappropriate to have a separation referendum would play with the voters.

On the evidence of their poll, Gray's more in tune with public sentiment on this than Supernat, who'll increasingly be flying in the face of popular opinion if he continues to bring the referendum bill forward in the current economic climate.
195

,

16/03/2009 19:09:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
196

,

16/03/2009 19:21:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
197

,

16/03/2009 19:22:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
198

European Scot,

16/03/2009 19:33:43
225 The Master

" How many of that 57% would still support it if the survey question made clear that the Nats will be using their rigged "consultative" question and that the question could be more meaningfully set by Westminster."

'meaningfully set by Westminster', would translate as meaning fully set to slant in one direction, for the Union.

" ... good point and illustrative of how the Nats' "consultative" question would soon be discredited in the event of a "yes" vote."

Perhaps the ' Nats ' could be persuaded to allow a more neutral organisation like the EU to help frame the question for them.
Westminster don't do balanced and neutral, sadly, just like this publication, it is totally alien to them.
199

Masterpiece,

16/03/2009 19:52:08
Come on, what would you all expect from Tavish Scott but to belitte anything connected with the SNP and the Independence question.

Indeed, for it to be any different he would be looking for a ministerial post in an SNP Government. Would he not?

200

AJM,

16/03/2009 20:09:17
#221 Miss H I do not know what you have to laugh about as I see it the SNP are the doing a good job at reducing their chances at the next election all by themselves.

AS is now starting to bleat on about mid term unpopularity when he kindly forgets that UK labour are also mid term so there is little effect.

SNP are loosing votes by cancelling proposals and looking a bit out of touch.

Take AS's ramblings on banks, another one today, I and, I am sure that you also, listen what Vince Cable has to say about the financial crisis, certainly not AS.
201

AJM,

16/03/2009 20:12:11
#233 Masterpiece, quite right you would expect Tavish to belittle anything to do with the SNP, and Labour, and Tory and any other party you care to mention. He is the leader of the LibDems you know.

If Tavish got a post in the next admin it would be a coalition, not a SNP government.
202

,

16/03/2009 20:20:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
203

Observer,,

Glasgow 16/03/2009 20:23:50
225 - I don't think it is up to Westminster to set the question, however that aside I don't think the electorate are as daft as you make them out to be.

The problem here is that the number of people voting SNP does NOT equate to the number of people who would like Scotland to be independent.

There is really only one way to find out if there is a genuine desire amongst the Scottish people to leave the Union - and the unionist parties are desperate to avoid it. I think there is an obvious conclusion to be
drawn from that.





204

AJM,

16/03/2009 20:33:46
#236 so what is AS on about.
205

Callum MacPherson,

Edinburgh 16/03/2009 20:34:19
Shared Ambition

Tavish Scott rightly calls for parties to put aside pantomime politics and calls for both further devolution and a focus on economic issues. What he doesn’t recognise is that the SNP shares Tavish Scott’s belief that these two issues, the constitutional status of Scotland and her best economic future, are fundamentally linked.

Of course the difference is that the SNP realises that independence is not just the rightful expression of Scotland’s national culture and identity, but the only means by which the Scottish Parliament can fulfil the shared ambition of the 5 million people living here; Scots, English, Indian, Polish etc, to make this country the best place it can be.
206

Ewan M,

16/03/2009 20:40:42
Vote for the SNP if you want conituued failure and a manifesto that you might as well wipe your back side with as they don't implement anything it.

Alex and his bunch of jokers are just full of hot air and smarm.
207

,

16/03/2009 20:41:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
208

Ewan M,

16/03/2009 20:42:57
#236 - 48% of the vote with turnout less than 30%! I think this is a case of Labour's voters not turning up than any reward for Alex Salmond not delivering SNP manifesto pledges.
209

,

16/03/2009 20:50:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
210

,

16/03/2009 20:53:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
211

dude,

wishy 16/03/2009 21:31:10
240 Ewan M, 16/03/2009 20:40:42

talking of broken election manifesto pledges check out the link below

http://tinyurl.com/9meghk

Kind of puts it in perspective does it not, also Jack mcConnel never even had one he said he would 'do nothing better' if i remember right.

At the very least the SNP are trying to make Scotland better and doing a great job up till now.
212

AJM,

16/03/2009 22:26:51
#244 Dem Scot I was on about the YOuGov poll in yesterdays Sunday Times.

You have to face that the SNP seem to be running out of steam lately LIT and SFT are 2 prime examples of where they were touted as being real alternatives. When it got tought LIT was dropped. SFT is a complete joke.
213

,

16/03/2009 22:38:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
214

,

16/03/2009 22:39:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
215

,

16/03/2009 22:47:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
216

Darien,

Panama 16/03/2009 23:12:24
#187 Spook: "Being Scottish however for me is real,its my culture,my county of birth and a place im proud off."

Lets put this another way. Try asking any other state or supra-national organisation if they recognise Scotland. The answer is no. Because Scotland is not a state. So you do not have Scottish nationality, neither does Doh, or anyone else who is from the UKofGB&NI. We are nationals of UKofGB&NI, not of Scotland. In other words, Scotland does not exists as a state.
217

,

16/03/2009 23:56:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
218

Los Angeles,

17/03/2009 01:15:32
"SNP are loosing votes by cancelling proposals and looking a bit out of touch" (AJM)

That is what is called Internet twittering - mindless statements with no basis in fact, purporting to be satirical comment but invariably banal waffle, usually fired off from a Blackberry often operated in close vicinity to a pub bar.
219

Doh,

17/03/2009 09:12:46
#256 LA

Nearly 300 people turned up to the public consultation meeting in Argyll - and gave the SNP a toasting for their plans to privitise Scotland's Forests.
Similar meetings and campaigns have been in other parts on rural Scotland.

SNP please please remain so high handed.
220

AJM,

17/03/2009 12:42:44
#256 LA Well i was saying they have run out of steam and looking a bit out of touch. But no up pops Christine Graham to revive the fortunes of the SNP.

Yesterday she was bagging on about rescuing a piece of paper. Today she launches an attempt to replace the dangerous dogs act. This is the sort of stuff we need in a economic slow down, less nasty dogs and the return of paper.

Rumour has it the SNP already has a short list of the dogs to be banned, they are apparentely any dog whose name vaguely suggests that it came from south of the border.
221

Billiam Wallace,

17/03/2009 14:57:34
Doh-doh, (as dead as a...), mentioned people complaining about the leasing of forests proposals being unpopular and the SNP being high-handed. Well the truth is they are not acting in a high-handed manner, they have listened to the people and have scrapped the plan. When have NuLiebore ever done that unless they were forced into a humiliating U-turn by a back-bench rebellion or a total wipeout in a parliamentary vote. (The 42 day detention proposal springs to mind). The SNP have their faults and human failings but at least they are trying. Nuliebore are JUST faults and failures, and are very very trying. They have no redeeming qualities at all. I know which I prefer.

Saor Alba
222

Los Angeles,

17/03/2009 17:04:29
"Nearly 300 people turned up to the public consultation meeting in Argyll - and gave the SNP a toasting for their plans to privitise Scotland's Forests." (Doh)

Then they were misguided in the criticism. The proposal was to LEASE selected sections of forest. The idea has now been shelved so what is your beef - that the SNP didn't listen?

What's high-handed about that?

Did the audience keen not to gain income from forestation demand more trees be planted on our denuded slopes and in glens?

No? Pity, Scotland could do with a massive drive to recreate our lost forests.

The Japanese, similarly bereft of their forests because of massive commercial over-exploitation, re-established them in only seven years?

Then again, Japan is a nation state and Scotland is beholden to ...
223

Los Angeles,

17/03/2009 17:07:08
"Rumour has it the SNP" (AJM)

Rumour has it that the SNP has some of the weakest ineffectual opponents wedded to Internet twittering.



 

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.