Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Gordon Brown warns: ' Retreat into 19th century nationalism is not an option'

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: 25 March 2008
THE Prime Minister will today stamp his authority on devolution discussions by stressing he will continue to make the case for the Union.
As Des Browne, the Scottish Secretary, announces the launch of the constitutional commission set up to examine more powers for the Scottish Parliament, Gordon Brown warns that there must be " no retreat into 19th century nationalism".

His strong intervention will be seized upon by critics of the commission, who claim the result of its deliberations are a foregone conclusion and that Mr Brown has closed his mind to any real change.

The Prime Minister also wants more focus in Scotland on wider issues such as the economy and national security to remind the population of the importance of the United Kingdom and the Westminster government.

In an article published today, he claims the Union reflects selfinterest for all the nations within " the world's most successful multinational state", but it is more than " a contract of convenience that can be renegotiated".

" The Union is a multiplier for good that too often and for too long has been taken for granted," he wrote. " It is time now to explain how the Union can benefit all of us and not at the expense of each other."

His comments come as Wendy Alexander, the Scottish Labour leader, Annabel Goldie, the Scottish Conservative leader, and Nicol Stephen, their Scottish Liberal Democrat counterpart, prepare to unveil the person who is to chair the commission. In the Commons today Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, is due to publish his latest constitutional reform proposals.

He will set out a statement of values that define British citizenship, with the case for a bill of citizens' rights and obligations. The constitutional commission will start work soon with the aim of making recommendations on which powers should be transferred from Westminster – and any that should be returned from Holyrood – within the next year.

The commission is Ms Alexander's flagship policy and an attempt to counter the SNP's national conversation, a discussion about independence. She has said the body should consider introducing more tax raising powers for Holyrood. But yesterday, Mr Brown was accused of attempting to " downgrade" the commission by renaming it a " review". The Scotland Office issued a news release describing the body as the " Scottish Parliament Review". Until now, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories at Holyrood have all described the tripartite group as the Scottish Constitutional Commission.

This was the name given to the body when it was granted parliamentary approval, and a spokesman for Labour in the Scottish Parliament was adamant yesterday that there had been no change of name. However, the SNP was delighted with the confusion.

Bruce Crawford, the business manager, said: " Gordon Brown has humiliated Wendy Alexander by seizing control of her commission, downgrading it to a ' working party' and reducing ( her] big vision to an attack on the Liberal Democrats for refusing to consider handing powers back to London."

A spokeswoman for Alex Salmond, the First Minister, added: "The question now is why the ' review', intended to be a body of the Scottish Parliament, has been taken over by Gordon Brown and announced by his Scotland Office colleagues."

Page 1 of 1

 
1

karinxx,

25/03/2008 00:08:49
and where in the scotsman is the mention of what he said about "to be scottish is to be anti union."

2

karinxx,

25/03/2008 00:09:28
with that comment brown will have annoyed the many scots who think of themselves as scottish first.
3

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 00:25:55
"But you said it was a 'commission' but he called it a 'review'!"

And the SNP yet again show why they are little more than schoolchildren. Very mature and statesmanlike!

4

subrosa,

25/03/2008 00:42:54
A commission or a review, it doesn't matter what they call it. It'll never come up with anything in the least constructive to help Scotland. We all know it's purely a superficial tactic to delay any form of giving us extra powers. That'll have to be undertaken by the SNP alone but they'll get there in the end I'm sure.
5

The Daleks,

Longmen 25/03/2008 01:28:47
Broon the Balloon.

Can't he get anything right?

Wonder what he'll do for a living after the next general election?
6

Guga II,

Rockall 25/03/2008 02:29:41
What else can you expect from Maggie Broon. His Union Jack underpants are too tight.
7

Advance Alba,

edinburgh 25/03/2008 02:29:59
I note the difference in approach between the unionist parties and the SNP. The SNP favour exclusively the top-down approach, where the politicians sit in closed rooms and do back room deals and then impose the results on the people. No consultation, just a stitch up deal done to suit the politicians. Then there is the SNP approach. Start by consulting the people, and all the way through it is a bootom-up approach, where the people say what they want and the politicians devise ways of delivering against what the people have said. A world of difference. The SNP trust the people. The unionists do not, and keep them coralled i n pens outside. I know which one I prefer.
8

Edward,

25/03/2008 02:44:57
Brown, as ever a control freak!
No wonder they called him Stalin Brown in the TReasury, when he was chancellor
All right thinking Scots, should ignore what the Labour / Libdem / Tory - Commission come Review come Working Party come out with, after all they ignored the Scottish people
9

Edward,

25/03/2008 02:49:35
Brown stated ' that to be pro-Scottish, you must be anti-Union'
The guy is unreal, hope the folk in Kirkcaldy that voted for him are proud that they have a complete idiot for an MP
10

Edward,

25/03/2008 02:52:42
Browns full article in the Daily Telgraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/03/25/do2501.xml
11

Edward,

25/03/2008 03:02:00
From the Telegraph article :
'the Union is more like a covenant founded on shared values'
Come again? Brown seems to be trying to re-write history here, by making out we were all jolly about it in 1707
12

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 05:14:08
New Labour in Scotland : 'Cringe' is what we do.
13

Argyll on line,

Argyll 25/03/2008 06:38:43
Remember John Major's 'taking stock'? Same farce all over again.
14

donald,

glasgow 25/03/2008 06:44:45
Commission, Review. What's the difference? They will be forced to concede a little more in a futile bid to stem Independence.
15

Alberto.,

25/03/2008 06:50:44
New Labour plc - Perpetual liars and cheats"

And aren't they excellent at it!!
16

McNasty,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 07:13:38
GB, MP and PM of GB should prove his "Britishness" by getting an English seat at Westminster.

He should join other losers like Malcolm Rifkind and Teddy Taylor where he belongs; out of Scotland.

17

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 25/03/2008 07:13:58
I can just see the effect of the review recommending the return of powers from Holyrood to Westminster over the objections of the majority of people in Scotland.
You may see a result similar to what they have had in Canada where the people in Quebec consistantly elect a majority on Nationalist MP's to represent their interests as they don't trust any of the Federalist parties. This results in the Block Quebecois having an effective veto over legislation as the main parties are unable to form a majority.

You may see an unholy alliance of the unionists in holyrood but you won't see one in Westminster. There efforts to crush the Scottish peoples aspirations will result in the vast majority of Westminster seats going to the SNP at the next election as they are the only party willing to fight for Scotlands interest's. If this the case the SNP may be in a position where neither Labor or the Tories are able to form a majority with the SNP holding the balance of power.

I
18

pehman,

sussex 25/03/2008 07:51:44
If you read through wendy's vision thing again you'll see that where she mentions more powers to Holyrood it states that these will be "CONSIDERED" whereas the other points she makes are all to be taken as real goals.

So the truth is there is no substance to any of it wheather commission or review. It's all just talk.

Just as an aside, suppose she does return powers to w/minster just as the tories take control, it should work wonders for the SNP

19

brownlie,

glasgow 25/03/2008 08:14:12
I hope that, at the next General Election, the SNP put forward a candidate as MP for the Berwick on Tweed area.
20

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 25/03/2008 08:29:56
It is a good thing that the name had been changed. An independent Scottish Constitutional Commission already exists and has been working for a long time already: http//:www.constitutionalcommission.org

Look at it from the point of view of a foreign diplomat having to report home to his or her government. Three opposition parties combine to review the constitution, the government of the day is excluded from the set-up, and the agenda includes only those proposals that these minority parties allow to be discussed. I don't think that will be taken very seriously anywhere else.

I will give the Labour Party credit for consistency. They tried, and failed, to kill the devolution project from the very beginning, but were forced into it by international ultimatum. Since then, their policy has been to water it down as far as possible, and keep the rest under their own control in order to prevent any further development. See the Scotland-UN papers at: http//:www.realmofscotland.com

They seem to be under the illusion that their one-party state in Scotland can somehow be revived. In a nation that has produced some of the world's greatest political philosophers Labour's survival will need more than an unreasoning gut reaction to the tide of change that is rolling over it. On present trends the Labour Party in Scotland is on the verge of permanent extinction as a political force - and justifiably so, because like other dinosaurs it has failed to keep pace with what is happening in the world around it.

21

Linda,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 08:41:34
Dinosaurs at Westminster obviously don't realise that Scottish economy cannot get any financial advantage until such time as the Scottish Parliament has full fiscal autonomy or independence.

The National Conversation considers all the options., unlike the British Nationalists Review which does not consider all the options and any proposals will be vetted by a Gordon Brown approved Chairman
22

John S,

25/03/2008 08:59:58
Gordon Brown to ask cash-for-honours donors to extend their loans.
By the end of this year, eight businessmen who lent Labour more than £10 million to fund the 2005 general election campaign were due to have their money repaid. However, the Labour Party would be unable to afford the repayments and they will be asked by Gordon Brown to extend their loans to Labour for up to a decade.
Under Mr Brown, Labour has grown increasingly dependent on the trade unions for funds.Telegraph 22/03/2008
23

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 09:14:23
Dr. James Wilkie,

You have made numerous interesting posts to this papers forum and you appear to be closely linked to RealmOfScotland.

However RealmOfScotland makes a number of grand claims surrounding the impact of the Scotland-UN papers etc.
Various posters have been wondering what real impact they had and what evidence you have to substanciate these claims.

Could you shed further light on any of this, or further online sources, please? I would like to know if there is another online forum to get further details?

Thanks.
24

Calum10,

25/03/2008 10:16:19
Not only is this a name change from Scottish Constitutional Commission to Scottish Parliament Review it also highlights that the Scotland Office is now in control of the process.

Labour, Tory and LibDems MSPs have sold out en-masse to 10 Downing Street. Scots can clearly identify Wendy Alexander, Anabel Goldie and Nicol Stephens as being nothing more than political puppets of the Westminster parties.

Under this review London calls the tune and Scots are now expected simply to dance to it.

Our response in Scotland should be a collective two fingers to the Scottish Unionists who continually betray the people of their own country.
25

frank mcbride,

lusitania 25/03/2008 10:18:58
This is a last desparate throw of the dice by the Unionist Alliance.

There will be an "interim" report, just before the Westminster election, which will say that the Alliance have agreed increased powers for Holyrood. These increased powers will, however, not be ennumerated, nor will the repatriated power to Westminster; strategic planning.

Do not be taken in by the Unionist Alliance.

For a fairer, more prosperous Scotland, vote SNP.
26

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 25/03/2008 10:19:18
#25 The www.realmofscotland.com website has no connection with the Scotland-UN Committee, which has now been wound up after its function was fulfilled with the recall of the Scottish Parliament. The organisers of the site merely requested the use of several of the S-UN documents, which are only a fraction of the total number. The series now lodged with the National Library of Scotland does not include some still diplomatically sensitive material that will be added in due course.

The only official admission to date that the proceedings mentioned in the documents actually took place was in a reply to a parliamentary question at Westminster by Dennis Canavan. It was, however, felt necessary to put the facts on record, without seeking widespread publicity, because of the Labour Party's totally unscrupulous abuse of diplomatic secrecy to present the devolution project as its own initiative and generally falsify the facts. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe will not open the relevant papers for the meantime, because the monitoring process is still going on, and the records of the Cabinet Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office will also not be available for some time.

The website contains only the bare bones of the story, because a full account of how the Labour leadership tried to kill devolution, and then hijacked it when prevention proved impossible, would strain the credulity of the readers. But it happened. In particular, Tony Blair and his small circle, including Donald Dewar, seem to have kept Scottish Labour generally in ignorance of the true background to the devolution legislation. Blair and Gordon Brown both ostentatiously boycotted the opening of the Scottish Parliament and the Holyrood building to demonstrate their opposition to the whole devolution project, and since then have been trying to keep it to the minimum they can get off with.

27

 Ayrshire Scot™,

25/03/2008 10:20:59
Retreat to "19th Century Nationalism"? Makes you think of things like "British Jobs for British Workers", "Union flags in every garden", 19th century wars of aggression?
28

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:24:58
I'm confused. Is this the same Gordon Brown that supported Kosovan Independence? Or is it the Stalinist Gordon Brown who would rather control everything himself, against the will of the people? Is which case, why does he apparently support devolution? Between him and Wendy, they really are making Labour unelectable for another decade.
29

Very Rev Ian Paisley,

25/03/2008 10:26:16
Keep being British = reducing social mobility, send the poor and young into illegal wars and ensure the wealth stays in the South.

No thanks Gordon
30

Calum10,

25/03/2008 10:30:02
Gordon Brown writing for the Daily Telegraph is a real slap in the face for the Hootsmon.

The Hootsmon and the Glasgow Herald have done their best to undermine the SNP with a daily diet of anti-nationalist stories and now Brown comes along and talks only to the Daily Telegraph, a paper that considers Scots to be a nation of subsidy junkies and whose readership considers Scots to be simply low-life scum that are an affront to Englishness.

Such rejection by Gordon Brown must really hurt the pro-Unions editors at the Hootsmon.

Perhaps the Hootsmon should take a leaf out of the Telegraph's book and starting attacking Scots for simply being Scots.
31

Alastair the First,

25/03/2008 10:32:43
A Wendy Alexander puppet? Who'd be cruel enough to but their kids one of those? Does it come with a fee Gordon Brown to pull its strings?
32

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:34:49
frank mcbride - interesting thought. Yes, if I was Labour, staring down the barrel of defeat to the tories, and hoping that, in their minds, their Scottish automatons are going to either not vote or (god forbid!) vote SNP, then they might well suggest greater powers for holyrood....which will then, of course, not emerge/be a hollow promise as they won't get in anyway.
33

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:36:35
Brown is clearly trying to be Britisher than thou to win the English heartlands. Hence this piece is in the Telegraph. Who is he for? Did he mention gazza's goal again??!
34

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:38:14
ref#38 I'd meant to say *thinking that, in their minds..*, not *hoping that,...*

Cup of tea time.
35

Alex, Young Laird d' Drumchapel,

Madrid 25/03/2008 10:42:40
Whenever Gordon is up to his neck in the Broon stuff over economy, embryos or whatever he suddenly starts to save Britain. Pinky red-herring is all it is. You see, if you keep changing the subject people won't realise you're a one man disaster area..

Not impressed!
36

Jimmy the Pie,

25/03/2008 10:54:38
Waffle away all you want Comrade Broon. Your days are numbered. I just hope it's as soon as possible.

www.snp.org
37

uranus,

Falkirk 25/03/2008 10:59:21
People from the South of the border are saying that Brown in power at Westminster is a sure catalyst for the quick demise of the Union. His arguments are full of holes and the only reason for his pontification of Britishness is to mask his illegetimacy as the PM whom no one wants South and North of the border. As Wendy Alexander will preside over decimation of Labour MPs in Scotland in the next election which will remove Brown's power base and no English PM at Westminster in the future would dare dictating to Scotland.
If I were Brown, I would be planning for a career elsewhere, perhaps at the European Commission or World Bank. The problem is Brown like all Labour MPs is a career politician.
38

stan102,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 11:01:16
Yet another soundbite from Gordon Turncoat Brown - why not spent some time and effort in looking for the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq thats costing us so dear in lives and tax Mr Brown.

You know something actually important to the people of this country.

39

Lauwrie,

25/03/2008 11:07:26
Nasty 7:13GB,
" MP and PM of GB should prove his "Britishness" by getting an English seat at Westminster. "

We don't want him .Brown is about as popular in England as rude smell in a lift .

40

iain morrison,

nairn 25/03/2008 11:07:26
Gordon Brown warns that there must be " no retreat into 19th century nationalism". - I agree as 19th century nationalism was the Union another Mr Bean (Nevile Chamerlain) moment to go along with his recent reference to Czechoslovakia
41

bratachdubh,

Dundee 25/03/2008 11:10:27
Just what exactly is "19th century nationalism"? The Jingoism of the British Empire?

The SNP appear to be practicing 21st century civic nationalism, as opposed to the 20th century jingoist Toryism Brown appears so fond of. No wonder the idea of "Britishism" has become a laughing stock.
42

irenecu,

Kirkcaldy 25/03/2008 11:15:04
I will never vote for that idiot or his war criminal party ever again.
I,and I am sure,many like minded people, have been persuaded towards the compelling case for independance, over the course of the last few months.
The SNP have promoted Scotlands interests more in the last 10 months than Labour has in the last 10 years.
They have a convert in me.
43

 Ayrshire Scot™,

25/03/2008 11:33:40
50. Only 16% of Brits are Labour, and 13% Tory, if the last UK general election proves anything.

Weird how the way votes are counted suddenly changed when the SNP won, usually votes are reported as a % of votes cast - which made the SNP Scotlands largest party at Holyrood and in local government.
44

Guga II,

Rockall 25/03/2008 11:36:44
"Mr Brown has renewed his attack on Scottish nationalism arguing that to be pro-Scottish, you must be anti-Union." (The Herald, 25 March 2008).

I can't see what is wrong with being anti-Union. What's Broon's problem? We know he had elocution lessons to get rid of his Scottish accent, to try and impress middle England, but now he wants to go further and prevent us being pro-Scottish.

I've got news for you Maggie Broon, we are not going to sell out our country or ourselves, for you or for anyone else.

He has also organised Jack Straw to tell us all, later today, what we have to do, and how we have to act, to be "British citizens". No doubt we will be told we have to support England at cricket (including the three people in Scotland that actually watch the stuff), and that we have to go along with Maggie Broon's Stalinist, totalitarian government; even when that war criminal wants us to continue to support illegal wars.

There may be some people in Scotland that are still bought and sold for English gold, but Broon, there are many more of us that are proud to be Scottish, and who want nothing to do with your servile and sell-out attitude.
45

Publius,

London 25/03/2008 11:39:35
Some interesting posts on the Telegraph website in reply to Brown. Quite a lot are English nationalist with one or two ant-Scots as well.
I don't know how representative these are. Telegraph readers are notoriously right wing and the Telegraph moderates out a lot of posts anyway. But Brown can only damage Labour in England by drawing attention to Britishness, devolution to Scotland (but not England) etc.
46

yockel,

25/03/2008 11:44:11
They'll be giving up 19th Century socialism next!
47

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 11:48:33
28
Dr. James Wilkie

Thank you for shining some light on a subject that still leaves many unanwsered questions. However, until such information comes into the public domain, what you are saying that we have to take everything that is written about the circumstances at face value.

There is no clear timescale of when such info might be made public either, if ever.

A parliamentary question at Westminster by Dennis Canavan and the response(s) should be available through Hansard?

You should be aware that various people have been asking questions about the validity of what is said about the UN-Committe ...

48

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 25/03/2008 11:50:55
This 19th Century nationalism - wouldn't be of the English/British sort would it as previous attempts at the Scottish variety were suppressed militarily in 1745, one century earlier.

"His strong intervention will be seized upon by critics of the commission, who claim the result of its deliberations are a foregone conclusion and that Mr Brown has closed his mind to any real change."

Whoops - there goes Wendy's buzz-phrase in her latest crash and burn episode.
49

The Master,

25/03/2008 11:59:56
#32 Jackie Priest: why wasn’t there a clamour for Scottish Independence at the same time as the campaign within Ireland during the nineteenth century then? The fact that there was a limited franchise didn’t prevent the Irish from eventually gaining separation, so there is no good reason why Scotland did not become independent many years ago, except perhaps that the majority just don’t want it. Can’t you see that you Nats are in an out of touch minority and have been since 1707? If there were any real demand or case for Scottish separation it would have happened long before now and this thread wouldn’t exist in its current form, take it from me!
50

,

25/03/2008 12:07:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
51

Sedov,

Scotland 25/03/2008 12:17:38
Brown is spot on about nationalism -its a recipe for total disaster. however, only the unity of all workers across the UK can beat him and the bosses he stands up for and the NATS should grasp this fundemental rule of solidarity. And I never had the chance to vote for him. The first thing Brown done after his coronation was to invite Thatcher to Downing Street and like Blair before him he is just another Tory in disguise. So much for his past rhetoric about supporting working people - get him out now!
52

kimba,

25/03/2008 12:17:48
53.As a member of the English Democrats,I can assure you the comments on the telegraph website are more or less how the majority of English people feel.
53

brownlie,

Glasgow 25/03/2008 12:20:01
Guga!! When did you move to Rockall - you'll have the guy from Ness confused. I must be one of the three who support the English cricket team - I, also, on occasion support their football team. I worked in England for many years and made friends and acquaintance there so I have no problems with the English per se - maybe the football commentators. That does not mean that I do not passionately believe in Scottish independence as this country, as well as England, have been disadvantaged for many years by Tory/Labour/Tory/Labour. You will also be aware that a very high percentage of the English population were against the illegal Gulf war despite claims to the contrary by many unionist posters so it is not just Scotland that are let down by Blair/Brown.
54

Jimmy the Pie,

25/03/2008 12:22:59
#52 Guga

Excellent post
55

walter,

25/03/2008 12:23:10
#56
What are you talking about, 1745 nationalism, it was one lot of royalist trying to put who they wanted as king of Britain on the throne and another lot of royalists stopping them.
56

Jimmy the Pie,

25/03/2008 12:28:10
I do like the way Our Dear Leader, Comrade Broon supports nationalism in countries like Kosovo, Tibet and then lectures us about being British. And all that drivel about swearing allegiance to Britain by schoolkids. The man is a total ersehole
57

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:30:53
I dont get why we english are getting so much flak here. (Apart from the Trots who ovviously have another agenda entirely).

Brown is your man, a Scot sitting in a government that should be english, whilst you have your own parliament as well.

All we want is english independence. And your Scottish insurgent Brown to sod off back to the highlands.

Is that too much to ask? So why are we getting the rudeness from you lot, we want the same thing!
58

Calum Crubag,

25/03/2008 12:32:41
It's British Nationalism that worries me. Brown's jinoistic 'salute the flag' plan for schools in almost fascist. The 'empire' attitude in invading Iraq IS a throwback to the past.

Look forward to independence.
59

Calum Crubag,

25/03/2008 12:33:51
#65 - i've got nothing against the English but most of our complaints are about your ignorance. Like, 'sod off to the Highlands'! Why don't you get a map and try and find Fife.
60

Calum Crubag,

25/03/2008 12:35:41
Walter #63- Charlie did anull the act of Union upon entering Edinburgh so the Jacobites did have a nationalist agenda. True, this may only to have been to garner support as the union in the cities was deeply unpopular.
61

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:37:59
67 Calum Crubag,25/03/2008

Our ignorance? Unbelievable.

I suggest you read the litany of garbage posted about us in this and other forums.

We're sick of you winging sctos, we just want to make it stop. If you read what you post, you make us found worse that nazi germany, which we arent.

The sooner you get what you want and we get what we want then maybe you can turn your griping on someone else.

And Im in the majority down here.
62

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:41:16
70 Rulesbutnotrulers,Federation, not separation

Ive been many times to the US, and you are not seriously telling me that many southern states dislike the rest of the US? Many would have like the south to win the war and break free.

Also Texas is NOT a country. England and Scotland ARE. So its not the same thing at all!
63

AJ Fife,

25/03/2008 12:42:48
In a future independent Scotland, would it be possible to deport or imprison Mr Brown for being anti-Scottish?

I don't think the usual jump leads and car battery will be enough for the dispicible Broon!
64

HughB,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 12:44:56
What words of wisdom spoken by the boy wonder GB, and what an intellect in WA.

Neither of these two wannabees were elected by the people, and they will never be elected by the people.
65

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:46:05
72 Jackie Priest,25/03/2008

Dont tell me....you were only following orders, right? Sic.

You were prominent partakers in all the empire did, dont try and rewrite history. You sound like some football manager excusing an inexcusable tackle.

Your argument isnt made any weaker by accepting our shared past. We are talking about issues NOW.
66

qohldr,

25/03/2008 12:48:24
#52
"Mr Brown has renewed his attack on Scottish nationalism arguing that to be pro-Scottish, you must be anti-Union."

When talking in terms of being pro Scottish in the nationalistic way then he is right.

Your last sentence is proof of that very fact.

There may be some people in Scotland that are still bought and sold for English gold, but Broon, there are many more of us that are proud to be Scottish, and who want nothing to do with your servile and sell-out attitude.
67

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 25/03/2008 12:53:34
What on earth is 19th century nationalism,and who is asking for that? If Brown is referring to the SNP aim of independence then that is the normal status for most countries.It recognises the interdependance in the 21st century of nation states and is based upon parliaments of equal status who collaborate on issues of mutual interest.This 21st century nationalism is outward looking and very international.It seeks to harm no one and to be a good neighbour.

modern concept of 21st century nationalism described here is supported by millions of people throughout Europe and the rest of the world.It is the norm.It is also supported by thousands of Scottish residents (across all ethic groups),and Scots abroad, who represent all types of occuptations and socio-economic groups.These people want to reach out and join the rest of the world.Many small nations in Europe have already achieved this. For example Finland where I currently live and Slovenia who currently hod the presidency of the EU.I am sure that the Slovenian Ambassador to the UK,who recently visited the Scottish parliament would not recognise Browns concept of 19th century nationalism.It is time that Gordon Brown started to listen accurately and stopped this agreesive rhetoric.It is insulting to many ordinary people in Scotland,and living abroad,who want Scotland to join the 21st century.
68

kimba,

25/03/2008 12:54:47
AJ. BUT HE ISN'T,"We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.....signed Mr G.Brown"; he's just looking after scottish interests,after all, who would pay for scottish "freebies" without mother England!
69

Iain's,

25/03/2008 13:02:05
Brown always talks about the past doesn't he.
So now seeking independence is a 19th Century thing.

Basically he is telling Africa, India and Pakistan that independence is old fashioned and they should rejoin the Empire.

70

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 13:11:15
"the Union reflects selfinterest for all the nations within " the world's most successful multinational state""

Hmm, where does that leave the EU then? What represents economies of scale, freedom of movement and multinational statehood better than the EU? What can the UK Union do that the EU cant do better in a modern world without nationalism?

But Wait...if reservation of key powers should be kept at nation level, then Scotland as a Country and a nation should therefore keep the powers that drive all the other nation states?

Oh dear, oh dear, the poor wee UK Brit nationalist/unionist numpty arguments have more gaping holes than Wendy Alexanders accounts records!


As for Wendy Alexanders 'Flagship' policy 'HMS Unholy Commision'.... I guess the flagship has well and truely sunk... and by another unionist into the bargain. What a farce!
71

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:11:49
79. It is about controlling your own country, not controlling other countries. One of yours i think,so please tell me why,the people of England should be governed by the "scottish raj",sorry,if we have to put up with them so do their own countrymen and women.
72

Conway,

25/03/2008 13:14:35
Its New Labour that is retreating back into 19th century nationalism BRITISH NATIONALISM.
It was SNP MSP Winnie Ewing that said STOP THE WORLD SCOTLAND WANTS TO GET ON and that is what the SNP wants.
To be part of the wider world.
the link to the Telegraph artice is .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/03/25/do2501.xml
73

Rampant Warrior,

25/03/2008 13:20:08
I take my hat off to Gordon Brown, this gentleman has a very hidden agenda. I'm sure deep down he wants to see Scotland separate from the UK.

His genius in slipping in the odd statement now and again, example - regarding how we must be subservient to the British monarchy etc.

Alex salmond & his party are the group to action Scotlands Independance. Gordon Brown and to a lesser extent the tory & Lib leaders are the catalysts.

The transformation has begun & there's no going back.
74

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:24:57
84. Here's a taster of some of the comments; Five million work-shy, loud mouthed spongers with their begging bowls constantly shoved in the face of decent, hard working English folk. That is the reality of Union. It means nothing to me.
Posted by Barry Field on March 25,
75

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:39:22
87. We have both the people and the will to govern ourselves,what we don't have is freedom to do so,brown signed an oath to put the people of scotland above all else,he is fulfilling that oath; free prescriptions,free care for the elderly,free uni places, and medication available in scotland for cancer treatment,whilst people in England and Wales die needlessly,and to cap it all England pays for the lot.
76

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 25/03/2008 13:46:26
Thinking again about Gordon Brown's very strange rhetoric about something called 19th century nationalism,there is a need to ask, what is wrong with him? He has been very weird recently and you do wonder what is going on.A man who formally lokked in control,now looks as if he has lost the plot.

For people who want 21st century solutions for Scotland,his reference to the 19th century is bizzare because it has no relevance to the here and now.looking back to the act of union,it could be said that 18th century unionism has no currency in the modern world either.That is,a solution devised in 1707 is well past its sell by date in 2008.We need to be foward looking not inward looking and backwards.I think that the changing world is a bigger threat to a solution fashioned in 1707 than the SNP.Popular though the SNP government are just now,they are the least of Gordon Browns problems.If he wants to hold back the tide,he had better be more effective than King Canute was.
77

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 25/03/2008 13:46:40
kimba's back! Run for your lives!


The comments from him/her are incomprehensible and arrant nonsense.

Why does one have to go into another mental state to TRY and understand what that wacky poster is saying?
78

Nat King Troll,

25/03/2008 13:48:20
#86 kimba:

84. Here's a taster of some of the comments; Five million work-shy, loud mouthed spongers with their begging bowls constantly shoved in the face of decent, hard working English folk. That is the reality of Union. It means nothing to me.
Posted by Barry Field on March 25,

You wouldn’t have any connection with this Barry Field character, would you? Only asking, Master
79

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:49:21
90.Then I suggest you take some reading lessons,or is that not in your capability!
80

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:51:21
91 not at all,go read the comments on the telegraph,there's plenty more like that one.
81

busbyfh,

25/03/2008 13:55:51
Most English folk want Brown out - The reason - Seemingly because he is Scottish.
Are you listening Gordon.
82

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 13:56:38
94. I would love to see Rangers and Celtic in the Prem! Utd and Liverpool playing at Ibrox!
83

ldopas,

25/03/2008 13:56:43
87 Jackie Priest,25/03/2008

On the contrary. Unlike you, we arent a jingoistic narrow minded winging little country. So having a scot or even an italian being the best person for a job in our country we dont discriminate.

Unlike you.
84

,

25/03/2008 13:57:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
85

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 13:59:23
94. Let's face it, our league is sh*te. When will an Embra team have a crack at the title? Or any non-Old Frim team for that matter?

At least in the English Prem, there are teams like Everton, Villa and (eventually) Spurs challenging for a top four finish.

Even little Portsmouth are having a crack at 5th this season!
86

,

25/03/2008 14:01:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
87

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 14:03:19
98. Only the nats are the 'little scotlanders' not wanting anyone else to have anything to do with them.

Most of us accept internationalism and globalisation as the future.
88

brettgallacher,

edinburgh 25/03/2008 14:04:40
he can stamp up and down as much as he likes but us true scots will decide our own future not an english puppet we need to stand on our own two feet and rise up and be a nation again forget the doctor dooms that say we cant survive without englands help ma buttcheeks we can and will prosper when we are able to decide our own future which my and thousands of other scots ancestors fought and died for
89

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 14:06:27
101. Half the teams in the CL quarter-finals are English and the English Prem is the wealthiest and most watched sports league in the world.

I get the feeling bitterness doesn't come into it.
90

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 14:07:33
104. LOL! So they shouldn't sing such songs as it wasn't just the English fighting??

Is that seriously your argument?!
91

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 14:10:22
106. What the hell are you on about?
92

,

25/03/2008 14:12:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
93

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 14:15:34
110. Ayrshire Scot, have you tallied up the number of posts on the national conversation yet?
94

democracy,

Scottish Borders 25/03/2008 14:33:57
Isn't it rich, the people that shout most about being patriotic Scots are the Unionists, the very ones that prefer their country be governed by a foreign nation, what an extremely weird and devient political psyche they have!! And they have the audacity to try and place that description at the door of the pro-independence Scots who prefer the more natural of world approaches, self determination!
95

democracy,

Scottish Borders 25/03/2008 14:37:12
Sorry,#113 should read 'deviant'.
96

kimba,

25/03/2008 14:38:47
96. I am saying, it's a great pity gordy didn't sign a oath to the UK,then maybe ALL her people would get the same medication when they needed it.
97

Boggle fey the Bog,

25/03/2008 14:41:10
#70 Rulesbutnotrulers,Federation, not separation

Just a wee bit of a difference there Rulesbut...,
Texas is the only state in the Union that can secede from it, without having the agreement of the Federal Government or the other States, as it was the only country ever to seek admission to the Union (it was the Republic of Texas , remember the Alamo, a mission fort called San Antonio de Valero at San Antonio de Béxar.)

Whereas Scotland was coerced into the Union, against the wishes of it's people, who are sovereign, and has been subjugated by the Westminster Parliament ever since.

Just a small point, that great Unionist, Sir W.S. Churchill had so much concern for the Scots that he ordered armed 'foreign troops' to Glasgow to put down the struggle for workers rights, he also gave great credence to the idea of using parts of Scotland to test his atomic weapons.

No, I am Scots and proud of it, and if that means being anti-union so mote it be!!!
98

,

25/03/2008 14:41:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
99

Scheme,

25/03/2008 14:45:35
Saw Broon earlier today on Sky news, I feel like throwing up when I hear his watered down Scottish accent. It's almost like he's ashamed to admit being a Scot.... but of course he's not, cos he keeps reminding us that he's a Brit.
100

Boggle fey the Bog,

25/03/2008 14:49:44
Anyone else having problems posting on the forum for this story?

'CBI: Forget 'conversation' and get on with running country'

101

The Master,

25/03/2008 14:51:00
Nat King Troll: 84. Here's a taster of some of the comments; Five million work-shy, loud mouthed spongers with their begging bowls constantly shoved in the face of decent, hard working English folk. That is the reality of Union. It means nothing to me.
Posted by Barry Field on March 25,

You wouldn’t have any connection with this Barry Field character, would you? Only asking, Master

I’ve just stuck my oar into the Telegraph under my Master moniker, as you’ll see if it eventually gets published, so shut it! Unlike your good self, I am no troll and strive to make quality contributions under this moniker!
102

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 25/03/2008 14:51:13
Gordon Who?
103

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 25/03/2008 14:57:54
I can see that there is a very active group on this site today who are attacking Alec Salmond and trying to disrupt rational dialogue by holding private conversations among themselves.These (often) off topic and private conversations are very annoying for individuals who want to use these sites as a focus for discussion with people holding diverse views.Give the rest of us a chance

Attacking Alec Salmond is not an issue but they should consider engaging with the public view about what they want before attacking a popular FM who is giving the electorate what they want. Policies to abolish prescription charges,abolish the graduate endowment,protecting local health services etc is what the public want.Essentially the recent public surveys reveal that the voters think that Alec Salmond is governing the country,and governing it rather well. Some on this site disagree but the polls indicate that the majority are pleased with his work.Even 66% of Labour voters prefer him to Wendy Alexander.
104

,

25/03/2008 15:07:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
105

kimba,

25/03/2008 15:20:00
126. You pathetic wee soul,and I hope you learn that I DO NOT GIVE A DAMN WHAT YOU THINK,so take your small minded billious rant and shove it up your ar@e!
106

Joe M.,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 15:20:45
Independence is normal internationally and is the logical end of the home rule journey. I've read Brown's article and his justifications for the union are not strong.

We can have a quality NHS and a much better public broadcasting service with independence and Scots were calling for universal suffrage at the same time as the English.

What could be more democratic than the Scottish people running their own country and the Saltire flying at the United Nations?

If Brown is saying imperialism is out of date then he is also making the case for the ending of the British state.

Scotland needs a new relationship with other countries based on equality. Brown can't even bring himself to discuss independence, that's why he's ruled it out of his review and why his proxy puppets at Holyrood are still trying to deny us a vote on it.

If he was confident of his case he would be willing to discuss independence, he's not.
107

,

25/03/2008 15:25:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
108

AJ Fife,

25/03/2008 15:25:30
#127,

Now now Kimba, you know the capital letters rule! I now make it:-

normal people - 3267
Kimba - 0
109

,

25/03/2008 15:25:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
110

The Strategist,

25/03/2008 15:30:02
You can't be a unionist and an economically patriotic Scot.

Alistair Darling told the FT he didn't believe in economic patriotism and Ed Balls says that the Govt is "blind to ownership" referring of course to company ownership.

The exception of course is that when it comes to financial services which are mainly City based then all of a sudden Darling becomes very patriotic and is even prepared to back failing banks with taxpayer money.

So the Govt's patriotism only seems to extend to the Square Mile and not beyond as indeed this weeks deal by the Indians to buy Jaguar and LandRover and next weeks deal for the French to buy British Energy will show once again.

The only upside is that quite soon the CBI will have to be renamed the CBIH.... or the Confederation of British Industrial Historians.
111

Fish Monger,

t'North East 25/03/2008 16:04:20
I feel strangely drawn to comment on this story. As an English nationalist, can I just say that I hope you Scots are proud of yourselves. Its not clever, no, not clever at all. Why can't we all just be friends? We should have a rainbow coalition, like in my part of the world. First in the UK, I believe. Why can't we all be friends? Everyone here has a smile on their faces at how perfectly everything is run.
112

kimba,

25/03/2008 17:02:32
Keep slagging me off guys, it's you who are getting your posts removed,how sad you nats really are!
113

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 25/03/2008 17:03:17
#92 kimba

I surmise from your nebulous postings that English is not your "mother-tongue".

Indeed, I can read but I read and understand postings that are comprehensible, clear, concise, and have a beginning and an end.

Yours are deficient in all the above criteria and I suggest you hone your English-language skills or go to a remedial reading and writing class.
114

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 25/03/2008 17:04:39
#55 There is plenty of scope for MPs at Westminster to use the Freedom of Information legislation to uncover the real story of how the Scottish Parliament came about - and it was not a voluntary act on the part of the Blair government. We know what happened because of informal diplomatic and political feedback, and I agree with you that it is high time the whole issue was brought into the open. The Labour Party has made far too much capital out of suppressing the facts.

115

kimba,

25/03/2008 17:07:30
AJ, Go and spout your bile on the Telegraph,see what you get back.LOL
116

Findlay Thompson,

25/03/2008 17:07:58
115

Jackie... Remember the Battle of Britain, sep 1940. That short term conflict brought the Nazi Military Juggernaut to a halt. Who primarily was responsible for this? A guy called Hugh Dowding and a chap by the name of Watson Watt.

Hugh Dowding orchestrated the defence of the south east of England, Adolph's primary target prior to conquest of England. Watson Watt he developed this RADAR device to work in partnership with Dowdings defense plans. By the way I believe both these men were Scottish, born & bred.
117

kimba,

25/03/2008 17:11:14
137.YEP,pity canada is so backward in educational needs,are you a chav,or just a sh-t stirrer.
118

kimba,

25/03/2008 17:14:47
137. Either way,you picked the wrong person to spout your bilious clap-trap too.
119

Fish Monger,

t'North East 25/03/2008 17:18:37
Aye, People here in the North East are known for there cleverness TimW - and there is no amount of scots that can raise are eye que - we have the most opticians in the country,says it all. We in the north east stick together, we are very close, families stay close as my mum and uncle dado always say, "lets keep it in the family".
120

 Ayrshire Scot™,

25/03/2008 17:22:08
137 Funny you say that, because Kimba has said (cuckoo) she was staking legal action against someone on here who said she was fat (she posted that she is 5 5" and 14 stone) - but gave the address of her "lawyers" as 70 Norton Road, Stockton - which is in fact a drop in centre for adults with mental health and learning problems (sad, but true)

121

Fish Monger,

25/03/2008 17:25:45
144 - its not, that is coincidently actually the location of my fishmongers, on the third floor, above the lawyers offices. Its unique - the only fishmongers on the third floor of an office block in the UK, I believe.
122

Fish Monger,

25/03/2008 17:38:01
and I know at least one of my customers here at no. 70 has fish fingers for tea tonight! How lovely!
123

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 17:44:45
115. So the Americans, Canadians, Australians etc. can't sing WW2 songs as they didn't fight the war on their own?

Is that chilled alpine air starting to get to your brain?
124

Comment is Free,

U.S. 25/03/2008 18:13:08
This is all quite fascinating to watch. Several aspects of this are just astounding. I will attempt to lay this out. I am also going to comment a bit on the Texas/USA stuff.

Regarding Texas and USA to get it out of the way. Texas is allowed to re-gain independence from the USA. It is the only state in the Union allowed to do so. It will automatically upon independence break up into five states. Some people wish that it would just hurry up and do that and then withdraw its president from Washington D.C.

Scotland Matters.

Gordon Brown appears to be preparing to write a book upon his probable up-coming loss in the next general election. He looks to be making arrangements with Doomsday Publications in Kirkcaldy for the 2010 publication date of the title "How to out British the BNP and other suggested Readings for the Unionist Establishment."

My question mainly is why are the Tories and Liberal Democrats not shouting bloody murder from the rooftops in Edinburgh at the usurpation by Neu Arbeit in Westminster? It seems that there has been a consolidation in Scottish politics along the lines of Northern Ireland. The Unionistas are banding together to fight the will and aspirations of level headed Scots who want the country back. Now the question has become, can the SNP hold themselves together long enough to achieve independence? Brown-Alexander(s) Alliance for Dynastic New Labour Control of all Parliaments seems to be the recruiting poster the SNP needed.

The '15 and '45. There are many of us on this side of the Atlantic because our people were on the side of Scotland and Charlie and were thrown out of their own country by a bunch of foreigners and their toadies.
Ditch the Union and have the first conversation on equal terms with the English in over 300 Years.
125

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 25/03/2008 18:16:10
If it sounds broon and smells broon it is broon. Not exactly a breath of fresh air, is it?

Can Labour not afford spin doctors these days?
126

walter,

25/03/2008 18:25:40
If you are Scottish and support the union then you are not a true Scot.
Does that mean if you are an Aberdeen fc fan and support Scotland then you are not a True Aberdeen fc fan.
127

New Town Resident,

25/03/2008 18:29:29
-52 GugaII. fyi cricket is the second most widely played team sport in Scotland. More Scots play cricket than rugby. If you visit the Cricket Scotland website you might learn a little more about the vibrant Scottish cricket scene. Oh and I think the international match between Scotland and England in Edinburgh next August 18th is a sell out. So that makes more than 3 people already doesn't it?
128

Reekin' Lum,

25/03/2008 18:32:53
Partially well said, #148- I happen to think GB walks on water- ref Scotland - so right. You have this fellow Brown who is blinded by ambition, as many of the Scots who went down South and achieved fame(some) and fortune and to tell them that the rest back home are about to break the Union is total anathema to them.
You have to remember that there have been 300 years of brainwashing, usurpation, and so on that you now have a bunch of people in Scotland who are so happy with the status quo, thinking that they can occasionally announce their Scottishness by sporting a kilt or whatever, but that's it. They have been totally subsumed by the English propaganda machine- where foreigners refer to the "English " government, the "English " army, "Englands" fight against Germany in WWII and so on and happy to accept it.

Until that mentality is changed, there is no hope.However, at least we have Alex Salmond for this moment in time and who might be the person to lead us out of this mess.
129

Reekin' Lum,

25/03/2008 18:36:41
New Town Resident# 151- so you like cricket but don't stuff that rubbish down our throats - most boring Godawful game going- you seem to have forgotten golf.
130

subrosa,

25/03/2008 18:56:59
We have # 131 Bob saying SNP supporters are all wealthy retired folk living in big houses in Crieff and on another thread AM2 insists that SNP supporters are from the lowest class of the employed (with many many stats to support his claim).

How I wish you unionists would make up your minds about the SNP supporter. Or are we too diverse for you to judge?
131

subrosa,

25/03/2008 18:59:03
# 138

Yes well said. That seems to be something the unionists just don't want exposed at any price.
132

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:01:17
Nobody believes that Gordon Brown will leave the United Kingdom with a formal Grundgesetz, a supreme law which even Parliament must obey. That would be revolutionary in British terms. But he is trying to reconstruct what he calls "Britishness". Brown is pushing for a new sort of patriotism uniting English, Scots, and Welsh, Afro-Caribbeans and Asians, Muslims, Christians, and all other faiths. This new patriotism would be constructed around loyalty to British institutions, and especially to what he calls "British values".

It's a strange moment to choose for that programme. The United Kingdom, as a multi-national state, is beginning to show signs of disintegration. In Edinburgh, the devolved government is now formed by the Scottish National Party (SNP), which narrowly won the Scottish Parliament elections on 3 May. In the Welsh Assembly, the Labour Party has just reluctantly agreed to a coalition government with Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party. And opinion in England is growing rapidly impatient with the whole constitutional structure Why is there no English parliament? Why do Scottish MPs vote on English matters? Why should Gordon Brown, a Scot from a Scottish constituency, be allowed to rule Britain as prime minister?

The London-based media make three assumptions. One is that English resentment against the Scots is on the rapid increase. A second is that a waning sense of British nationhood and British values must be restored. A third, involving the state we still call the United Kingdom, is a gathering expectation that the Scots will march out of it. All three propositions, as I see it, are misunderstandings: some of them wilful deceptions, others defects of political imagination.

133

New Town Resident,

25/03/2008 19:02:03
-153. I wrote team sports. Most cricketers also tend to be keen golfers, especially when they get older, including me!

-151. The international will be televised, so you will get a chance to watch it if you wish. I think if you visit a public house that day on a purely fact finding trip (and the game isn't rained off like the Aussie one was), you will find plenty of Scots watching the game.

134

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:02:35
The first topic is Scotophobia. For the last year, an intelligent Scot reading the London papers, or watching London-made political TV shows, could only conclude that sharp dislike of Scots and Scotland is spreading across South Britain on a scale without parallel since the eighteenth century. The ignorance and nastiness of some of this journalism has been startling. The Daily Telegraph described Scotland as "trapped in the squalor of dependency" and asserted that "until recently an English voter hearing Gordon Brown's Fifeshire accent would simply have said to himself 'Labour'; now, he says 'Scottish'". The lopsided devolution settlement has created a sense that the Scots are having their cake and yet guzzling away at it'.

Since then, the papers have railed on. They accused a Scottish mafia of dominating the Blair Cabinet. They suggested that Scottish ministers, from the safety of northern constituencies, were driving through measures hateful to the English, such as tuition fees in higher education (Brown now proposes to cut them). They picture Scotland as pampered by unjustified English taxpayers' subsidies -and yet nagging for more.

On the Daily Telegraph website, hatred of the European Union is closely associated with resentment of Scotland. Ending the older Union is seen as the precondition for ending the newer one. "Time to disband the 1707 Union, let the Scots join the Euro, kowtow to the French for extra subsidies &c, and let England move on to its destiny." Some Tory MPs and their commentator friends even proclaim that Parliamentary government will be raped and trampled now that an MP from a Scottish constituency is prime minister
135

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:03:30
How real is all this fury, and does it reflect what English people think about Scotland and the Scots? I am certain that on the whole it does not. Southern views of the Scots over the last hundred years have been faintly sceptical – "chippy, lacking in humour, slow to unbend" – but on the whole affectionate. (Contrast English attitudes to Welshness, which, for reasons I am not sure of, are often genuinely hostile). And the English have shown noticeable tolerance, taking on board that some Scottish touchiness was justified. The days when an Englishman could comfortably refer to the Highlands as the most beautiful part of England are now unimaginable (though actually not that long ago). As for Scottish independence, polls as far back as the 1970s showed that most English people thought that it would be "a pity, after all we've been through together, but if they want that, I suppose they have a right to it". Unionist politicians must have found that absence of panic unnerving. They still do.

In other words, this present flare of Scotophobia began as little more than a media ramp, fuelled by and to some extent coordinated with the Conservative Party. Its motives are transparent. When the bombardment opened last summer, it was obviously targeted to damage and disable Gordon Brown, the Conservatives' future adversary, before he reached Number Ten, Downing Street. It's fascinating that professed Unionists should be ready, in order to knock out an adversary, to touch off this barrage against Scottishness in general and Brown's Scottishness in particular, against those damned Scots who are such fragments of grit in the otherwise creamy perfection of Britain's constitutional arrangements.
136

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:05:08








Nonetheless, relentless repetition of these grievances does begin to wear a dent into public opinion. Iain MacWhirter, political commentator for the Herald papers in Glasgow, received a torrent of cross and sometimes abusive posts – over 1300 of them – when he tried, late last year, to explain Scotland's political and financial realities on the (left-liberal) Guardian's website. It was the usual stuff: Scots whining while they grab our money, abusing our parliamentary system and taking over England. As MacWhirter comments, "the idea of a Scottish 'Raj' running England is so extraordinary that it's difficult to say anything coherent about it". But the really interesting point about these emails, like those on the Telegraph site, was this: that all but a handful saw the solution to their complaints in ending the Union.

This isn't Scotophobia. It's Anglophilia. The ICM poll of November 2006 suggested that 59 per cent of English respondents would prefer Scotland to be independent, while 68 per cent of them wanted an English parliament of their own. While the media and political campaign against the Scots has not apparently made the English more anti-Scottish in any general, xenophobic way, it has had the effect of boosting the slow resurgence of English national self-awareness which first became noticeable some ten or twelve years ago.

Was that effect intended by the new Tory leadership? It's hard to know. In the short term, there are Tory votes to be gained in the South by calling for a ban on Scottish MPs voting on English matters ("English votes for English laws"). In the longer term, the prize the Conservative Party could win by evicting the Scots from British politics altogether is enormous, so overwhelming, in fact, that it makes most Tory MPs nervous.

137

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:06:42
Since the 2005 elections, Labour holds 286 of the 529 English seats at Westminster, a clear majority. But this result from Westminster's "First Past the Post" electoral system conceals the fact that the Conservatives actually won more English votes than Labour. The lesson is that any serious Tory revival could carry the party to an almost impregnable domination of English politics – as long as those Scottish MPs aren't there to spoil it.

Tempting in theory – but would anyone dare to pick that prize up ? In 1997, John Major tried to make "the defence of the Union" (No to devolution!) his main election plank. It fell hopelessly flat; nobody cared. Today, opinion polls show that the Union is unpopular north and also south of the Border. And yet I suspect that a question worded: "Do you want the break-up of Britain?" would get a different response, at least in the next few years. For the moment, I cannot imagine any Westminster- British political leader bold enough to propose dissolving the 300-year-old Union Treaty. Nonetheless, as I want to show later on, a truly ambitious, coldly clear-sighted leader – once in power – could now bring about a situation in which the Union would unravel and it could be made to seem all the fault of the Scots.

Scotophobia in England is largely a media invention and has not been very effective in its own terms. But it has accelerated a current of English national grievance, political and cultural, which was already flowing. And the object of this grievance is not so much Scotland as Britain itself.
138

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:08:20









In the film Monty Python and the Holy Grail, King Arthur rides up to a muddy peasant woman and announces: "I am the King of the Britons". "King of the who? Who are the Britons?" The king answers rather uncertainly: "We are all Britons!" Well, perhaps we are now all muddy peasant women, because the notion of Britain is plainly growing less convincing. The last British Social Attitudes survey showed how, in the ten years up to 2005, the English sense of British identity had declined by 8 per cent to less than half the sample, while primary identification as English had risen by 9 per cent. (The far steeper decline in Scots prioritizing British identity – now down to 14 per cent – has been known and written about for many years now).

It is now nearly ten years since "Diana Week" in London revealed how English nationalism was returning. Central London was a sea of red and white English flags, with hardly a Union Jack to be seen. St George's Cross has become the flag of the heart for millions of English families, a symbol of allegiance which has now spread far beyond the football stadiums.

The big questions about the future of this particular nationalism – whether it will find serious and effective leadership in the English professional classes, and how far it will edge along the spectrum from sullen, xenophobic, "ethnic" feelings towards more "civic" programmes for reform and emancipation – are being avoided by the Brown government. No wonder! This new consciousness begins to challenge Britishness just when Gordon Brown sets out to deepen it. There is a growing conviction among the English that although they form 90 per cent of the UK population, the British state structure condemns them to be its victims and losers.
139

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:09:26
There are parallels, of course. One was the late Habsburg Empire in which the core imperial population group – the Germanic inhabitants of Austria – began to lose their identity in the age of rising nationalisms. Robert Musil put this well: the Czechs knew they were Czech and the Hungarians knew they were Hungarians within the Empire, but the Austrians were just Habsburgers? I thought of Musil when I read a passage from Sir Keith Ajegbo's recent "Diversity and Citizenship" report. The investigator was talking to a small Year 3 girl, who was the only English child in her class. When all the others had talked about their origins, she said sadly : "I come from nowhere!"

We must allow for differences, of course. The Germans were a minority in their state, the English are an overwhelming majority. And terminology comes into it. People in the Habsburg Empire, weird old patchwork as it was, knew the difference between a nation and a state. In recent history, the Irish, Scots, and Welsh never had any difficulty distinguishing the two either. But the English never grasped it, and few do so even today. It is only in the last ten years or less that you come across Westminster politicians referring to the UK as a "multinational state".

The muddle over words is significant. Nor has it always been exclusively English; in the eighteenth or early nineteenth century, successful Scots were happy to describe themselves as "English" in the outside world and did not make much fuss when southerners referred to the whole island as "England". Sir John Seeley wrote his prophecy of global imperial destiny in 1883 under the title: "The Expansion of England". For generations, the fact of England's numerical predominance in the UK was hidden behind the image of the island English as the heroic founding few, outnumbered by the millions inhabiting the British Empire.

It was only in the late twentieth century that civil servants and educators began to insist that English people should be
140

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:11:14
It was only in the late twentieth century that civil servants and educators began to insist that English people should be polite enough to refer to themselves as "British", in order not to offend Welsh and Scottish sensibilities. Patiently, they did so, only to find that the Scots and the Welsh still identified them as English and found all this Britishness stuff rather evasive. Conceived as a well-meaning stroke of political correctness, it had the effect of concealing the truth that the English still used their wealth and numbers to call the shots in the UK. And almost inevitably, the English backlash slowly began. Who were all these eggheads and Eurocrats and Scottish carpetbaggers to tell us who we are and how we should think in our own country? Why should we, the majority, be the victims whose tax money is spent by people we didn't elect? Why can't we have a parliament too?

English self-assertion is the most intimate of all imaginable threats to the "Ukanian" power structure. So the Britishness campaign – or campaigns, because there are several – sprang up in rebuttal. They propose that Britain is a nation, like Holland or Hungary, which possesses some essential cultural identity and "typical values". But I have to say that if you want to get to Britain, I wouldn't start from here. You will squelch into some really bad history. Seven years ago, the BBC History Department made an ass of itself by naming its Millennium TV series "A Thousand Years of British History" (suggestions that a more accurate title would be "A Thousand Years of English Expansion" were coldly received). Even now, it seems that not enough people have digested Professor Linda Colley's work: "Britishness was superimposed over an array of internal differences in response to contact (and conflict) with the other " – i.e. with Catholic and then republican France. In other words, Britishness can exist when the nations of the UK face a common external threat or challenge: in war, in the armed fo
141

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:12:26
Many years ago, when Gordon Brown had only just joined Tony Blair's government, he tried to give some body to vapid New Labour slogans about unity. Brown began to analyze possible objects of patriotism, and he proposed that the National Health Service should be such an object. It was a common achievement, a great moral reform done in the name of fairness and justice, and all the inhabitants of the United Kingdom should be proud of it and ready to defend it. (I'm glad he didn't say "die for it"). This remains to me the most impressive thought Mr Brown ever put forward, since he edited the Red Paper on Scotland back in 1975.

It's impressive because what it implies is utterly subversive. Patriotism gathered round an institution of reform created in the name of the people is a republican concept, not an Ancient British one. And that leads to an even more shocking thought. Does it follow that the only way to muster a united New Britain would be around a programme of interventionist state socialism?

But since then, Brown on Britishness has followed a more conventional pattern. In a Daily Telegraph interview last year (in which he praised the patriotism of Mrs Thatcher and Winston Churchill, but of nobody in his own party), he defined British virtue thus: "Most nations subscribe to universal values like freedom, but it is how these values come together – in Britain's case, in liberty married to social responsibility and to a belief in what Churchill called "fair play" – and then are mediated through our institutions and our history, that defines the character of the country".

142

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:13:45
Attractive, but not much there solid enough to build a patriotism on. Jack Straw, foreign secretary under Blair and now Brown's minister of justice, defined "British values" in what he called "a nation of nations" like this: "The core democratic values of freedom, fairness, tolerance, and plurality that define what it means to be British". But don't they also define what it means to be Norwegian? Alan Johnson, when he was Blair's education minister, also had a try: "Free speech, tolerance, respect for the rule of law, which are not exclusively British [values]". Or Slovenian, or Irish, or Australian? He was commenting on the Ajegbo report about "Diversity and Citizenship". The report suggested compulsory lessons for 11- to 16-year-olds on British values, emphasizing respect for other cultures and tolerance of religious differences, and discussing freedom and justice. The Times snorted: "This proposal is less Elizabeth I and Winston Churchill than Barney the Dinosaur meets the Commission for Racial Equality. Whatever Britishness may be, it is surely not the mush that is now being proposed."

All that one can say is that the mush spoken about Britishness matches the mush thought about Britishness by the inhabitants of this archipelago.

In a chapter of the British Social Attitudes report I mentioned earlier, the research team found that their sample was baffled by an invitation to define British values. They had no idea what these might be. Pressed to rate institutions by their importance to British identity, most of them thought the monarchy and trial by jury were really important, but they didn't think that free speech mattered very much and were not impressed by the way government worked.
143

Doctor S,

25/03/2008 19:16:50
continued at:

http://tinyurl.com/2ak726
144

Reekin' Lum,

25/03/2008 19:28:55
Doctor S thank you for the link.
145

Lastsocialist,

Europe 25/03/2008 19:45:03
Brown is a moderately intelligent man but this is just the usual patronising 'New' Labour guff. Scotland is a lot older than the Union. In any case, why is British nationalism (which is what he is defending) any better than Scottish nationalism? Surely British nationalism, with its history of shameful imperialism (in which Scots unfortunately participated freely) is by far the more immoral and irrational of the two ideologies. It is therefore highly ironic that Brown speaks against a return to 'nineteenth-century nationalism' when it is precisely what he is defending.

Vote SNP to keep the New Labour British Nationalists out of power. Give power back to the English, Welsh and Scottish nations and disrupt the Londoncentric power structures that have done nothing to advance the cause of the regions.
146

Lastsocialist,

Europe 25/03/2008 20:06:01
164 - 'the late Habsburg Empire in which the core imperial population group – the Germanic inhabitants of Austria – began to lose their identity in the age of rising nationalisms. Robert Musil put this well: the Czechs knew they were Czech and the Hungarians knew they were Hungarians within the Empire, but the Austrians were just Habsburgers?'

Well said; another parallel would be with the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 90s. Serbs were the dominant ethnic group in the Balkans and still talk pathetically about 'Yugoslavia' even though no such thing exists. Defenders of the Union are really just the Serbians of the British Isles - people who refuse to recognise the movement of history and who will do anything to cling to power.
147

,

25/03/2008 20:06:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
148

Lastsocialist,

Europe 25/03/2008 20:13:26
173 - you got it in one.

149

Saoghal Beag,

25/03/2008 20:22:49
gordon says "it's ma baw an am no playing" if nothing else at least labour are consistent in their policy of petulism.
150

 Ayrshire Scot™,

25/03/2008 20:29:03
175. LOL. The powers of advanced punctuation
151

yockel,

25/03/2008 20:32:46
177, 175, Yes I was impressed by that too. Not many threads get better as the day wears late.
152

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 20:34:11
We shouldn't be ashamed to be Scottish or British. A whole raft load of Nancy PC groups have made the average person think that if they have the slightest bit of pride in their own that they are racist and should go to the nearest clinic for some correction.

I am proud to be Scottish and proud to be British - I wouldn't want to come from any other and I don't want to see our shores overrun by gold digging foreign hoards either. It damages our identity and regardless of what the politicians say it DOES hurt our economy in the long run -- a growing population gives the illusion of success but if your economy is based on expanding numbers as opposed to expanding industry then your view ends before your nose does.

The Labour Party raped Scotland for years with corruption, nepotism and their disgusting union cohorts that destroyed British industry. I am for the union for the simple reason that there is not one politician in the Scottish Parliament that I would trust to run a Coffee Kiosk let alone a country - though I have to admit the SNP have been a breath of fresh air - If we had the quality of people in office that could run an independent Scotland then it would probably get my vote - small is beautiful and if, as a nation, we could go down the path of small non interfering government with a small but effective infrastructure then we could do it -- but tax and spend politicians rule the day right now and that model just won't work here.

I long for the days where public servants were public servants and not the masters and overlords they are attempting to become. It is about time we showed these pumped up trollops that the people are still in charge.
153

yockel,

25/03/2008 20:54:45
Evening conversation at No10 tonight and every night, "I say chaps what sh1te are we going to give the McChatterers tomorrow to keep them off topic,"
"Oh don't worry Leader Gordo, the Hootsmon will promote it whatever it is."
"Yes but it is becoming tedious being so bizare, sometimes I believe I am begining to make sense."
"Possibly, possibly, but Jacqui believes you so I doubt it, why don't you try some of this stuff Leader, It's perfectly harmless."
" You mean like Alex?"
"Well no, not exactly, think Wendy on this one."
"I'll give it a miss thanks, maybe some other time, perhaps. Good night then, until tomorrow."
154

Elizabeth I (1558-1603 AD),

edinburgh 25/03/2008 22:16:57
Jackie Priest, in reply to your posts:

You really ought to go and see a doctor. I think you are very unwell. Seriously. Your posts on this forum are beyond belief. Can I ask you one question. Are you Anti-English?
155

DaveK,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 22:18:55
Vote SNP and let the world see we are not just a nation of skirt wearing tripe eaters, but we vote for offal as well!
156

Stefania Alvarez,

25/03/2008 22:26:15
Brown is the Prime Minister ... and he is Scottish.
People her might be forgiven for assuming that this is Alex Salmond's job.
However Hollyrood is only a devolved assembly ... not a real government
157

,

25/03/2008 22:45:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
158

Dougie Douglas,

Brisbane 25/03/2008 22:59:46
I take it '19th century nationalism' is some sort of reference to British Nationalism?
159

john z,

edinburgh 25/03/2008 23:06:19
You know, the way things are headed, I wouldbn't be surprised if we don't end up with civil war. How dare the english parliament try to take the powers away. I am Scottish, and NEVER BRITISH.

We have a democratically elected Scottish parliament. Westminster wants to remove its powers. Over my DEAD BODY. Got that Brown, Wendy and straw?

Just look at the way the Westminster spin-meisters are lining up all the headlines at the same time. A perfect piece of spin. Manipulate the media in true dictator style. Do Labour think the people of Scotland are stupid, and don't notice all this media manipulation??


It is the kind of thing you would expect in Communist China.

And as for the lib-dems...what a bunch of labour serving clowns. They truly have no credibility in Scotland.

Why will Brown not let the people decide in a referendum. What are the unionists so afraid of?? The truth?
160

Kenny A,

25/03/2008 23:14:01
103 Highland

Donky peel as the say in SA. Be proud to have roots in a land you can identify with, my wife is a serious orientaly type and she is now more Scottish than I am and thats saying something.

Internationalisim and globalisation as the future, does that mean I have to wear a turban and bang my head on the concrete five times a day, I think not somehow.

Enjoy the diversity we have, cut out the racialisim and biggotory that seems to pervade every society that exists and build on the strengths of those that went before.

186

Same comment directed to you as well.

Now I will try to do some damage limitation, I am disagreeing with you folks but not for the reasons you may think. If we all turned the same what a boring existance we would lead. I am also attempting in a feeble way to say get along with each other but glory in our differences because that is what sets us all apart and that is what the future will be built on.

Sorry guys read this post before I sent it but I am trying to express and honest sentiment, while trying to say if we were all the same that would lead to stagnation.
161

McGinty,

25/03/2008 23:22:44
I'm in favour of independence, but gnat trolls, especially one or two smartalicks who do verge on the nationalist to the point of fascist are messing it up. You know who you are. There's quite a lot of people in Scotland in favour of independence, not to mention growing support for the SNP, but we're all being branded as nationalists and extremists, which is a bit screwed up 'cos we're governed by a national party, not a nationalist party and have several, albeit small, national parties in opposition. So I suggest you smart gits, take it outside and leave politics to those who don't believe in a state of nature, or in your cases a state of bestiality. And clean up your language.
162

,

25/03/2008 23:44:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
163

Sanny,

Portugal 26/03/2008 00:52:26
22 Dr. James Wilkie

Dr. Wilkie – I know you were party to ‘The Scotland –UN Committee’ that succeeded in persuading the Council of Europe to bring pressure on the UK Government to bring in the devolution bill under pain of European Sanctions.

Unfortunately the part played by The Scotland-UN Committee is largely unknown. I also understand that by its nature much of the work must remain confidential. Nonetheless can some action be taken to make the Scottish public aware that Tony Blair and New Labour had to be forced into devolving power and have constantly fought to reduce the effectiveness of a Scottish Government? The convoluted voting system was introduced to prevent the possibility of an SNP majority government.

The whole saga of The Scotland-UN committee would make a great TV Documentary and serve to educate the Scottish electorate in what a loathsome bunch our Unionist supporting politicians are.
164

Roy,

26/03/2008 09:32:32
' Retreat into 19th century nationalism is not an option'

19th century nationalism, the era of empire and jingoism when Scotland almost disappeared into oblivion, is exactly what Brown is about.
165

shivago8,

livingston 26/03/2008 09:33:50
Gordon Broon does not speak for Scotland,he dictates,connives,backs down when he is on a loser,all from Westminster.
Although a Jock he will not be remembered for the good things[he,s not done any]but will certainly be remembered for being a turncoat and not someone that I would ever want to meet.
In fact I would forcibly tell him some home truths
166

Farky,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 09:41:29
19th century nationalism?

Gorden, is that what you told the people of Kosovo...?
167

Finnking,

Lempäälä 26/03/2008 10:16:29
Gordon on Kosovo:

"Prime Minister Brown said:

"I have written to President Sejdiu to tell him that Britain will now formally recognize Kosovo as an independent sovereign state ... I believe this is a step forward for the international community and this follows the meeting that has already just finished with the European Union foreign ministers."

So: Kosovo: "I believe this is a step forward for the international community"

....and, Scotland: '....that there must be "no retreat into 19th century nationalism".

I agree that the comment regarding 19th C Nationalism is an absurdity. It's also embarrassing having a PM coming out with undiluted, illogical, drivel.

It is the 'uk' that is isolated and consumed by "19thC nationalism"; part in Europe, not quite ready for the €, opting out of EU treaties, fighting US wars against the wishes of the people etc etc.

New Labour, the conservative party of a conservative state run by and for wealth but paid for by the masses. A two party system in which one party continues implementing the wishes of wealth while the other party is out of favour with the masses. Voting patterns controlled by a media that has become a unimpeded conduit for business run government propaganda.

Bring decision making closer to the masses and you see more public political activity and awareness, greater scrutiny of the political bodies and stem in the flow of wealth up to the elites resulting in better eduction , health and community.
168

,

26/03/2008 11:17:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
169

Venango,

northwest Pennsylvania 26/03/2008 12:10:29
Isn't 19th Century Nationalism a form of support for the United Kingdom with the Scots being "North Britons"?
170

Venango,

northwest Pennsylvania 26/03/2008 12:12:09
Isn't 19th Century Nationalism a form of support for the United Kingdom with the Scots being "North Britons"? If it is, than it would be best not to 19th century style Nationalaists.
171

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 26/03/2008 13:50:56
#192. We were a bit wary about acceding to the request from the organisers of the www.realmofscotland.com website for the use of one or two of the Scotland-UN documents, because we were aware of the difficulty of backing them up with evidence that mostly cannot be used because of diplomatic confidentiality. If we were to use all of it our sources of information (and hence our effectiveness) would dry up overnight.

The website owners inform me that it received almost 10,000 hits after a mention in the Herald comments, and this time the Scotsman comments resulted in almost 8,000 hits. In view of that, we have been asked to supply some additional and previously unpublished Scotland-UN material for the website. This will take a while to organise, and of course it must exclude anything that is still diplomatically sensitive.

The Labour Party has a pathological fear of this story coming out into the open, and are sitting on the lid to keep it down, but of course they cannot conceal it for ever.

172

Joe M.,

Edinburgh 29/03/2008 02:14:03
The only narrow nationalism is Britain's delusional version. Scotland want to be equal with other countries, Brown's Britain thinks its better than other countries, but it really isn't.

It's clear that neither Labour or Lib Dems support the Claim of Right for Scotland any more.
173

RightTurn,

29/03/2008 19:19:19
Surely the SNP stand for 18th century nationalism, not 19th century?

Brown and the Labour Party are finally standing up for the Union after almost ripping the heart out of the United Kingdom with their flawed devolutionary project.

Devolution was never meant to give Scots more say over their own lives. The Scottish political establishment only pursued devolution in order to stop Thatcherism at Gretna Green.

I think many in Labour are now regretting campaigning for a Scottish Parliament. It's hardly killed the SNP "stone dead" has it?
174

Evia,

05/05/2008 23:11:20
Why are we still talking about being British, Scottish etc. We are soon to be Europeans, flying the Euro flag because there will be no more Great Britain.

http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2007/08/05/163-europe-wipes-britain-off-the-map/

http://www.eutruth.org.uk/

http://www.tpuc.org/
John James Harris - Freeman of England within Common Law

http://www.stuartwheeler.co.uk/
Why I am suing the Prime Minister by Stuart Wheeler
175

Over the rainbow,

somewhere 06/06/2008 21:59:55


Whose's listening.

Things getting more and more desperate.

Desperate Broon
176

livilion,

livingston 07/06/2008 13:31:00
197 Evia,
There will always be a Great Britain, that's the name of the mainland of our Atlantic Archipelago off the west coast of Europe.

What there will not be is a United Kingdom of those islands but an Ireland, England and Scotland pooling their sovereignty and co-operating as they once did as England, but now encompassing their neighbours on the continent.
177

livilion,

livingston 07/06/2008 14:06:53
196 RightTurn
Margaret Thatcher and her lovechildren Blair and Brown represent an unholy desire for 19th century gunboat British Nationalism and military adventures.

Devolution was intended, according to Bernard Ingham, to slow down the Scottish march to independence long enough to cream off the money from the North Sera Oil bonanza and so save the UK from bankruptsy.
The idea of using force was considered for if and when the Scots ever got wind of the true worth of the 'Extra Regio Territories', Whitehall speak for the North Sea, but the gullibility of the Scottish electorate to Unionist mendacity rendered this option surplus to requirement.

Scottish nationalism has he-haw to do with 18th century nationalism, which was about invading other nations and ripping off whatever you could lay your mitts on.
England was for many years up until before the first world war the acknowleged world leader in this sort of thing.

21st century Scottish nationalism is about doing what the people of Scotland want, in Scotland, and leaving other peoples in peace to get on with running their own affairs for the benefit of their poeple.

The Labour party hardly campaigned for devolution. Westminster records show the 'peoples party' blocking and emasculating the devolution bill from its inception in the 70's right throught to its eventual realisation.
Since when they have resisted every attempt to improve its utility to the people of Scotland until overwhelmed by the tide of public opinion here.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Is the parliament building at Holyrood still worth all the fuss?
No, people have got used to it now
Yes, it sticks out like a sore thumb in the Old Town
Yes, the £414m cost still hangs over the building

Featured Advertising



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.