Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Cameron concedes Tories were wrong to oppose devolution

Premium Article !

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

Options

Premium Article !

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

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

Sign In
Register
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: 27 June 2009
By Joe Quinn
CONSERVATIVES were wrong to oppose devolution, party leader David Cameron conceded today, adding the party in power should have paid more heed to the calls from Scotland.
Meanwhile, Tony Blair said he acted on calls for devolution, but was "probably pretty unionist" by temperament.

Both were speaking in a BBC Scotland programme to be screened tomorrow marking the tenth anniversary of devolution.

Of his party's p
revious long-standing opposition to devolution Mr Cameron said: "I don't think we got it right. You can argue that the principled position, of arguing that devolution within a unitary state is extremely difficult and there are all sorts of problems it brings, and those problems are there.

"But I think where we went wrong was we should have spent more time in government thinking, how do we give legitimate help to those people within our United Kingdom who want to have a greater expression of self-government?"

Meanwhile, Mr Blair said he could recognise that the feeling of being Scottish as well as British had to be recognised.

"I'm by temperament probably pretty unionist," he told the programme, Holyrood and the Search for Scotland's Soul, to be broadcast at 10:20pm.

"On the other hand, I could see, and studying the history reinforced this feeling, that there was a genuine desire on the part of people to have more say over the things that were happening around them."

Former Labour first minister Henry McLeish told the programme that Mr Blair did not embrace the spirit of devolution, but he was a "pragmatist" who ensured the completion of unfinished business.

But the current SNP First Minister, Alex Salmond, said that Labour's drive to deliver devolution was motivated by fear.

"That was fear by the Labour Party of the SNP," said Mr Salmond. "The feeling that things had got to such an extent that, unless this was delivered, proposed, endorsed by the people, then the result would be that Labour would lose control over its heartlands and fiefdoms."

Gordon Brown told the programme that devolution was a response to a gradual centralisation of government.

"There is a strong Scottish identity, but I think that what's happened is that over a hundred years, government became concentrated," the Prime Minister said.





The full article contains 381 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 27 June 2009 12:48 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Devolution
 
1

Brianwci,

27/06/2009 00:55:09
"Cameron concedes Tories were wrong to oppose devolution"

No problem David, instead you can get it right by facilitating Independence when the time comes.....quite soon now.
2

redcliffe62,

27/06/2009 01:17:13
this is ewminently sensible from cameron, and one of 3 things he needs to do, not just broadcast this in scotland but to a brotish audience.
this is precisely how he can get the vote from 17% to 21% and gain seats in the east of scotland where tories sit 2nd or 3rd in the votes at this time, with most of the west still being a write off for the tories, 4th against the greens often being a good result.
1/ admit tories are london centric and that they now agree that devolution is a good idea and they were wrong.
2/ admit thatcher's butchering of linwood, ravenscraig, bathgate and the introduction of the poll tax were acts of treachery on scotland and that good lady or not under her the tories had no interest in looking after scottish interests. we were wrong, cannot take it back but lessons learned. this may only happen out of deference to her when she dies, but it is needed to be said now.
3/ accept that if scotland chose to be indpendent a scottish unionist party would continue to stand with un ioniost principles albeit with most matters being centred on edinburgh not london.

3

redcliffe62,

27/06/2009 01:18:29
wrong to oppose devolution, hmmmm......so why is annabel saying not to do anything now?
i think we have heard that before,from the same fiddle.
4

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 01:22:31
We've been here before. Back in the 1950s when the British Labour Party was busy reneging on its "home rule" promises, the Tories latched on to this as a way to ingratiate themselves with the Scottish electorate.

It worked. In the 1955 General Election the Conservatives took the majority of Scottish seats with over 50% of the vote. Other issues played a part, of course. But the rather vague slogan, "Scottish control over Scottish affairs" was enough to appeal to the underlying desire for greater autonomy.

If there is one lesson that the people of Scotland should have learned by now, it is that the unionist parties lie to get their votes and betray them once elected. It is a fact of Scottish political life.

5

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 27/06/2009 02:29:21
Oh here we go again,come North of the border and say one thing then go back to england to say completely the opposite. Yes good question how come the interview is not being broadcast in england, simple Cameron and War Crimes Blair do not want the english to know how much BS the two of them are spilling onto the Scots for votes. Sorry guys the game is up, the Scots have had enough of being governed by another country, and are the doorstep to INDEPENDENCE. Roll on Referendum Day when we can FINALLY SAY GOODBYE TO THIS CORRUPT LIEING THIEVING UNION WITH ENGLAND. Have a nice day.
6

redcliffe62,

27/06/2009 04:38:14
so scotland should be in charge of many of it sown affairs, including raising revenues from resources says cameron?
NOT.
same old drivel.

we will defend the union even if it means scotland suffers as a consequence say brown?
ABSOLUTELY.
same old driver here as well.
7

redcliffe62,

27/06/2009 04:38:36
so scotland should be in charge of many of it sown affairs, including raising revenues from resources says cameron?
NOT.
same old drivel.

we will defend the union even if it means scotland suffers as a consequence say brown?
ABSOLUTELY.
same old drivel here as well.
8

Castaway™ ,

27/06/2009 04:43:56
2009 David Cameron Of his party's previous long-standing opposition to devolution Mr Cameron said: "I don't think we got it right

1951 Tory manifesto-The United Kingdom cannot he kept in a Whitehall straitjacket. The Unionist policy for Scotland, including the practical steps proposed for effective Scottish control of Scottish affairs, will be vigorously pressed forward.

1968 Edward Heath, the then Opposition Conservative Party - The Declaration of Perth. The declaration favored devolution and recommended that in Scotland there be created a directly elected body with legislative power.

1979 Margaret Thatcher wanted to prevent the creation of a Scottish assembly by amending Labour legislation to allow the English to vote in the 1979 referendum on devolution.

1992 Tory manifesto-The plans for devolution put forward by the other parties would have a grave impact not just on Scotland and Wales, but also on England.

1997 Tory manifesto -In the Tory Party’s 1997 manifesto such devolution plans for Scotland and Wales are still strongly opposed

1997 John Major, the former Prime Minister urged Scots to reject devolution in the referendum.

Margaret Thatcher and her successor, John Major, sought to kill of the whole idea of devolving power to a parliament in Scotland.
9

The Pict.,

Canada/Edinburgh 27/06/2009 04:54:56
Right on! Scotindy.
Slainte Mhath.
10

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 27/06/2009 07:24:30
Perhaps in 10 years time, David Cameron's successor will be apologising and saying the Tories were wrong to oppose Independence. Typical unionist parties in Scotland. Always behind the curve, trying to catch up.

#9
Is it any co-incidence that the change in Tory opposition toward Scottish self-rule was directly proportional to the revenues being being stolen from Scottish Oil.
11

mr broon,

Edinburgh 27/06/2009 07:25:11
Anyone naive enough to believe the leader of the Conservative Party should take a reality pill?

At the end of last century, the fag end of Empire Tory Party never had any intention whatsoever of devolving power to St. Kilda, never mind Scotland, and was implacably opposed to any form of Scottish self-government!

In 1997, the Scots voters punished the paradoxically, anti-Scottish Tories, by completely rejecting their policies in a General Election result from which this political party has never recovered.

To this day, many Tories are still implacably opposed to devolved government for Scotland and that is why the vast majority of the Scottish Electorate still continue to treat this party with great suspicion.

The Scots Tories, by their own arrogance, brought about the resurgence of Scottish Nationalism, and now find they are unelectable!
12

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 27/06/2009 07:35:42
#5 I'd amend what you say slightly
"If there is one lesson that the people of Scotland should have learned by now, it is that the unionist parties lie about Scottish self-rule to get their votes and betray them once elected. It is a fact of Scottish political life"

This truth needs to be repeated again and again and again, until every Scottish child knows it from pre-primary.
13

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 27/06/2009 07:49:33
No doubt Cameron will put on the shiny new clothes of "increased accountability" (which is a laugh coming from someone who sits in Westminster) and tell us all he has ALWAYS supported this.

As anyone with any experience of real life, only the very worst managers who are seeking to cover their @r$e$ and are looking for a scapegoat give people more accountability, but no authority.

This is what Calman is seeking to do: give the Scottish Government responsibility for raising taxes in Scotland, but no authority over the taxes collected in Scotland.

The wet-dream of unionist parties would be for the SNP Government to start using the powers it has to increase taxes.
14

Marian,

27/06/2009 08:48:30
This is a late conversion by the Tories under David Cameron but very welcome if it can be believed.

However the unionists much lauded Calman Report appears to have imploded due to brilliant political out manouvering by Alex Salmond after he called Calman's bluff and offered to place their proposals as an additional question at the independence Referendum vote.

Annabel Goldie was all enthusiastic about Calman until she went to London and found that David Cameron was not so enthusiastic because applying Calman might accelerate the break up of the union.

Also whats his name the New Labour placeman in Scotland went to see his joint leaders (i.e. Brown and Mandelson) in London and left with a flea in his ear.

Only Nicol Steven is still half committed but now wants even more powers for Scotland within a federal UK.

They say a week is a long time in politics and so it has proved for Calman which in all likelyhood will now be committed to the political dustbin that all so-called threats to the union are placed by the unionist parties of the UK.
15

preddo53,

leeds 27/06/2009 08:54:31
My plea to the people of Scotland is for you to vote for independence, I think that will solve a lot of problems, the Scots want it and so do the English. If the Scots get a referendum on independence then so should the English, this will ensure the breakup uf the UK, as the English crave Scotland to go it's own way.
16

dunedin bully wee 1877,

27/06/2009 09:06:10
The Tories in Scotland have always struck me as being remarkably politically inept, (not that I am complaining of course).

In the 1950’s they enjoyed majority support within the electorate and even had the backing of almost all of the Scottish press, including the Daily Record.

Back then, and being fully aware of the over 2 million signatures to the “Scottish Covenant”, they endorsed the principle of decentralisation of power and at least some degree of “Scottish control of Scottish affairs”.

They actually have a long tradition, now since long forgotten apparently, of supporting the concept of what is now known as devolution.

In support of that comment, I offer the following little extract from the life of John Buchan, author (39 Steps et al), Earl of Tweedsmuir, Governor General of Canada, and pillar of the establishment.

“in a 1927 by-election, Buchan was elected as the Unionist Party member of parliament for the Combined Scottish Universities. Politically, he was of the Unionist-Nationalist tradition, believing in Scotland's promotion as a nation within the British Empire
Buchan once remarked: "I believe every Scotsman should be a Scottish nationalist. If it could be proved that a Scottish parliament were desirable... Scotsmen should support it."

“Unionist-Nationalist tradition” indeed!

Maybe one day I will get round to start writing my Phd thesis on this subject.
17

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 27/06/2009 09:12:14
Politicians flipping on devolution is no great surprise - they flip on everything else.

Wait for the 2020 Headline:

"Scots tory leader admits they were wrong on independence."
18

tartan army 2222,

27/06/2009 09:29:18
"Cameron concedes Tories were wrong to oppose devolution"

In a few years we'll be replacing the word 'devolution' with 'independence'.
19

tartan army 2222,

27/06/2009 09:30:20
Sorry Luigiana lol. Didn't see your post - great minds and all that ...
20

TWC,

exLabour 27/06/2009 09:48:41
"But I think where we went wrong was we should have spent more time in government thinking, how do we give legitimate help to those people within our United Kingdom who want to have a greater expression of self-government?"

Cameron is about to do the same thing again, -- give Scotland Full Fiscal Autonomy that is the minimum we will accept.

All these Westminster Politicoswill do anything to keep control of our money.
21

,

27/06/2009 10:01:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

TWC,

exLabour 27/06/2009 10:03:15
16 Marian,

Tavish has the ability to bring about the federal or FFA by supporting the referendum with that as an option. The fact is he is not allowed because he is also controlled from Westminster.

17 preddo53,leeds

No need for Independence, Full Fiscal Autonomy would solve the problems really quickly.
23

Dr. James Wilkie,

Isle of Barra 27/06/2009 10:07:14
Yes, Labour and Conservatives are all admitting now that devolution has been a great success, but none of them is prepared to come into the open and admit that it was finally introduced only after threats of international sanctions against the UK. The vile methods used by Labour in particular in their unsuccessful attempts to kill the devolution project are a stain on British politics. I would suggest celebrating the tenth anniversary of the Scottish Parliament by opening all the relevant records of the Cabinet Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. However, since that would effectively indict those responsible I am not waiting in anticipation. See: www.realmofscotland.com/paper
24

karin Mac,

27/06/2009 10:09:03
if all pareties agree devolution is so great I think that their is a question everyone should be asking

the question is why does westminster NEED to keep any powers when we have a scottish parliament that is capable of using them?

that question SHOULD have been what calman was about.

25

karin Mac,

27/06/2009 10:11:57
calman should have asked what powers does westminster NEED to keep and why

why did calman not do this we have to ask why did they look at what further powers COULD be devolved.

the answer is that calman was just a sop to try and stop the snp and the unionists had and have no intention of following through with the powers calman proposed.
26

karin Mac,

27/06/2009 10:14:59
25 good morning dr wilkie.
27

karin Mac,

27/06/2009 10:19:28
I suggest that every single person in scotland petitions the european parliament and demands that a referendum be completed on scottish independence as scots have never been asked did they want to be part of the UK.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/public/staticDisplay.do?language=EN&id=49
28

frank mcbride,

lusitania 27/06/2009 10:29:42
With regard to Tory commitment to Scotland:

For the older generation: The Declaration of Perth, 1968

For the less old: "How good we English are to the Scots.", Thatcher, 1987

For the older youngsters: The Tory NO campaign, 1997.

For the youngsters: "We are Unionists and will do NOTHING that endangers the Union.", Annabel Goldie, 2009.

Equally relevant quotes can be applied to Labour during the same time period:

Callaghan, 1979 Referendum.

Blair: "Parish Council", 2002

Brown: "I will do whatever it takes to preserve the Union.", 2007/8/9.

McConnell: NuLabour Manifesto, "no need for change to the Devolution settlement.", 2007.
29

Liber Respublica de Scotia,

27/06/2009 10:31:22
I predict that the Westmincer Government will gladly accede to Scottish independence once they have completely exhausted the reserves of The North Sea oilfields.

After all, the retention of Scotland's property, and control of her geo-political and economic affairs, were the motives behind the Privy Council's attempts to thwart the devolution process under Thatcher and Blair.

The reason for opposing independence in binary;

i). To generate optimum profits from the continued harvesting (looting) of Scotland's crude oil, gas and petroleum, while it is still controlled by Westmincer;

ii). To render Scotland bereft of the world's staple trading commodity, and hence diminish her prospects on the global markets, fostering future economic dependence, in the event of the rightful materialisation of Scottish independence.

It could also mean the the newly independent England would have to find alternative sources of the said resources; or, Heaven forbid, actually pay the applicable market values for every barrel that enters the country.

Wouldn't that be a culture shock?
30

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 10:37:06
30
Hagbard Celine

"'sfunny, I seem to recall it was them who introduced it."

Only after a century of lies and broken promises. And only because of the electoral threat posed by the SNP. Even then the BLP, while making all the rights noises, connived behind the scenes to put obstacles in the way of devolution - notably, the "Cunningham Amendment" which co-opted the dead and apathetic to the cause of denying Scotland's aspirations.

In short, the BLP has nothing to boast about when it comes to devolution.
31

John S,

27/06/2009 10:41:53
#16 Marian:Annabel Goldie was all enthusiastic about Calman.

16 June 2009:Scottish Conservative leader Annabel Goldie is today meeting UK leader David Cameron and Mr Mundell to discuss the implications of the report. A Conservative insider said: "While we are not going to sign up to every spit and comma in the report now, I think it is clear that we would only want to make minor adjustments."

26 June 2009: But Ms Goldie was also having to defend her party's approach to the Calman proposals after she said the process "should not be rushed".
A spokesman for Ms Goldie said: "We have a duty to carefully consider the report, especially as it is likely that it will be a Conservative government in Westminster which has to deliver the changes."
32

redcliffe62,

27/06/2009 10:47:51
if labour had to get 40% support of the living before being allowed to govern they would not be back in until the 25th century.
gretaer lanarkshire not withstanding, where a monkey with a red rosette has a better than even chance of winning no matter what they screw up.
33

John S,

27/06/2009 10:59:19
#34 Electric Hermit: Ref "Cunningham Amendment" with that undemocratic 40% rule lets us remind ourselves:- 1979
Do you want the provisions of the Scotland Act 1978 to be put into effect ?
Yes - 51.6%
No - 48.4%

That is what turned me against the BLP and my decision was confirmed by the McCrone report, then came PR for the SP but not for Westminster for which the BLP had in their 1997 manifesto. ex NUM/EEPTU
34

preddo53,

leeds 27/06/2009 11:22:36
29 Karin Mac.

Tell me how you can have an independent Scotland in the EU, sorry, but the words "independent" and "EU" are complete opposites, there is no inependence within the EU, or have you just come out of a coma.
35

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 11:24:58
38
preddo53

"...there is no inependence within the EU..."

Other nations seem to manage perfectly well. Why do you suppose Scotland is, uniquely, incapable of being an independent member of the European Union?

36

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 11:42:36
I didn't say that, I never mentioned the word "Scotland", you have a habit of putting words in my mouth. I said there is no independence within the EU. The EU runs the EU, not individual governments, you must have noticed. We live under 11,000 new laws not made in this country, laws forced on us, laws we didn't vote for. The only way Scotland could achieve independence is for Scotland to have a referendum on the EU and pull out, but you don't need me to tell you that will never happen.
37

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 11:49:50
40
preddo53

"I didn't say that, I never mentioned the word "Scotland", you have a habit of putting words in my mouth."

38
preddo53

"Tell me how you can have an independent Scotland in the EU..."

Fool.

38

Darien,

Panama 27/06/2009 11:57:07
"Mr Blair said he could recognise that the feeling of being Scottish as well as British had to be recognised"

Correct terminology that, the "feeling" of being Scottish, because that is all it can be at the moment, a "feeling".

And Scotland is recognised by whom? Not by other nations its not, as they do not recognise any nation called Scotland. To other nations Scotland does not exist as a nation. It cannot, so long as Scotland remains a mere part of the recognised oddly named 'nation' known as UKofGB&NI, or 'Great Britain' (sic).

So long as Scotland remains a part of the UKofGB&NI, being Scottish (or English for that matter) can only ever be a "feeling"; Scotland is not currently a nation as to be a nation, you have to be recognised as such. And for its citizens to enjoy the nationality that nation and its international recognition affords, you have to have far more than a mere "feeling" of nationality.

You have to have substance; and the substance of nationhood (i.e. recognition and nationality) is dependent on national independence. These are the real qualities of nationhood. Until that is achieved, we Scots can only ever "feel" we are Scottish. Only at such time as Scotland resumes its position as a real nation, will it and its people be considered as such. And I suspect also considered with a lot more respect than any Dave Boy spiv from Perfidious Albion can muster.
39

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 12:12:11
Hermit, you are a very sad person, if the highlight of your day is to come on here and ridicule people because they have a different view from yourself then I feel sorry for you. I'm not a fool, please stop your attacks. If you can't put together a reasonable arguement it's hardly my fault, you probably just need a little more experience of life.
40

TWC,

exLabour 27/06/2009 12:18:17
43 preddo53,

I think he was answering your arguement that you hadn't mentioned Scotland in your point about Independence in EU.
41

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 12:22:40
43
preddo53

Quit whining! You claimed not to have mentioned Scotland in your ill-informed comments about the EU. That was a lie. When you can't even be honest about your own utterances, why would anybody take you seriously.

42

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 12:27:11
TWC, but its true, you can't be independent within the EU, collective thought, it doesn't matter if you dont agree with the collective thought, you still have to put it into practice. It's the reason we didn't get a referendum on the constitution, in case we voted no. Ireland, France and holland voted no, but they still got it, where's the independence there.
43

Darien,

Panama 27/06/2009 12:27:24
Gordon Brown says: "There is a strong Scottish identity"

He's quick. Give that smart lad a coconut. So we Scots have an "identity". mmmmmmm. Wonder what he means?

Like all Scots-British Nationalists Brown has an identity crisis and suffers from delusion. He believes he is both British and Scottish. In fact any such dual nationality does not exist. So long as Scotland remains a part of the nation known as UKofGB&NI, that is all that Scotland can be - a part of another 'nation'. An appendage. A bit. A region. A colony. But not a nation.

Internationally, at the present time Scots can only be considered as British; this is because "Scottish" does not exist (i.e. other nations do not recognise a Scottish nationality or nation).

To say that Scots have a mere "identity" suggests GB knows all about the history of the British Labour Party, but kens no very much about the history of Scotland. Thankfully soon the British Labour Party will be history. And so will Brown, who will be off to educate the silver spoon brigade at Harvard and Yale on the black arts of spin and spivery, for which he is undoubtedly an expert.

Hopefully thereafter once he and his kind have departed, Scotland and the Scots can become recognised once again for rather more than their "identity", or for being simply a 'part' of the oddly named 'nation' recognised universally as UKofGB&NI.
44

Alan B,

27/06/2009 12:41:02
#preddo53

I think you are getting to caught up in the semantics of what independence means. In terms of the debate over the union it means getting out the union.

Off course when you join the eu their are implications for sovereignty but the countries that are members are independent sovereign nations. There may come a time if the eu centralises enough power where countries effectively stop being independent nations.

Technically i would say if the eu is federal countries would stop being independent but if it is confederal as at the moment then countries are independent.

But it is just semantic discussion that distracts from the main issue of whether the uk union is damaging to scotland and whether dev max or a clean break would allow scotland to be better governed.

An independent scotland in the eu would be free to do what other independent countries do. Raise and set their own taxation, run their economy within the constraints of the single market rules and those of the WTO, decide when to go to war, run its own transport system, decide it own legal system without having to ask london to change drug policy etc, run its own welfare system.

If you look at the major power areas education and health are devolved bit or transport and law and order but most of the rest is run by westminster.

The eu allows the freedom of movement of people and has a single market, a common currency which the uk does not even use, with an aherence to human rights.
45

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 12:42:28
46
preddo53

"...you can't be independent within the EU..."

Currently, 27 sovereign states manage this perfectly well. Why do you imagine Scotland would be any different?

46

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 12:42:51
Hermit, come on is that the best you can do, some arguement, as I said, you need a little more experience of life. I think Scotland is quite capable of going it alone, in fact I wish Scotland well. But Scotland like England will never be independent while it is a member of the EU.
47

karin Mac,

27/06/2009 12:50:43
I have just watched this video and blairs body langauge speaks volumes.

watch what his head is doing when he is speaking and ask yourself what you mean when you move your head in the same way he does.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/scotland_video_and_audio/8121384.stm
48

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 12:54:47
50
preddo53

"But Scotland like England will never be independent while it is a member of the EU."

An empty assertion for which you cannot even offer a supporting argument.

There are presently 27 independent sovereign nations within the EU. There is no reason whatever why Scotland could not be the 28th.

In fact, there is no viable alternative to independence in Europe. Ill-informed whingers such as yourself prattle about quitting the EU. But you are tellingly silent about of such an action. The reason you are silent is that you haven't even considered the implications and consequences.

Proud ignorance of what the EU is and how it works is not a sound basis for analysis.

And wishful thinking is not a sound basis for policy-making.

49

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 12:56:40
51# Karin. He doesn't speak with any conviction, whatever he says take it with a pinch of salt, I'm still waiting for the education, education, education bit to come into force, and it's been a long 24 hours for him to save the NHS.
50

Alan B,

27/06/2009 12:57:26
The tories simply do not have a vision for a uk constitution.

Also why be so pro a centralised uk union but anti a much more devolved and decentralised eu union. It does not make any intellectual sense. More just a uk union is ok because england dominates and can effectively get her own way 99% of the time where as the eu union is really about negotiation and compromise.
51

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 12:57:34
#52 CORRECTION

Third paragraph third sentence should read,

"But you are tellingly silent about the implications and consequences of such an action."

Clumsy editing. Sorry!

52

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 13:00:00
54
Alan B

"...where as the eu union is really about negotiation and compromise."

Not something which fits well with an ideological adherence to constitutional monarchy and parliamentary sovereignty.

53

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 13:09:32
Well Hermit pray do tell me the implications of quitting the EU, I can't wait for this one. You're going to tell me we can't stand alone without the crutch of the EU. We can't be on the outside, we'll be ostracized, we'll have no friends, we need to be at the heart of Europe, yeah, I'm sure, and don't teach you're granny how to suck eggs, Iv'e listened to that tosh for years. I like 76% of this country want out, you are in a minority, if the EU was so good most would want to stay in, but as you know, that is not the case. Blind ignorance, well thanks for that, I didn't realise I was, you could always give me some of the medication you're on, what mind bending drug is it.
54

Alan B,

27/06/2009 13:14:54
#Electric

"Not something which fits well with an ideological adherence to constitutional monarchy and parliamentary sovereignty"

While I am a republican and would do away with the monarchy, I Do not really agree.

Other eu countries within the eu netherlands, luxembourg etc have a monarchy and are happy within the EU.

I think it is more to do with a parochialist little englander attitude together with an establishment that is still caught up with attitudes from the empire and imperialism.

The uk has done itself no favours by isolating itself so much.
55

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 27/06/2009 13:18:51
57 preddo seems to me reading your posts you are a "little Englander" UKIP type person that is so prevalent in England.
Someone that refers to Europe while not accepting he is also a European.

A distinct dislike of Johnny Foreigner is one of the least attractive traits of our English friends and neighbours.

As someone who lived and worked in England for many years I have had first hand experience of this jingoistic behaviour.

Even today on Radio 5 The "Andy Murray haters" are in ful swing because he like most other Scots sickened by English sporting commentators bile is a ABE supporter and told them so.
There was also al inking of Kenny Dalglish being as dour and unlikeable as Murray.
It has more to do with the fact that neither of these 2 are English or behave like sycophantic knee benders like Hansen.
I prefer my European neighbours than the narrow minded ittle Englanders any day.
56

Alan B,

27/06/2009 13:24:14
#preddo53

"I like 76% of this country want out"

What country? England or Scotland? Where do you get your figure from?

Consider the implication of the uk leaving from an economic point of view. The uk had been in a downward economic spiral since ww1 with the decline of the empire. It is only since the uk joined the eec that the uk economy has reversed our international economic decline. And that has improved even more since the single market introduced at the end of 1992.

The uk growth rate since 1993 has been good with international competitivenss far better than the 60yrs before.

A uk outside the eu would be outside the single market. The right pretend that becuase they believe (correctly) in the merits of free trade that the uk would carry on outside trading with the eu as if nothing had changed. Barmy.

The eu with 400million people market and a much smaller uk would mean the uk would be in a take it or leave it position and would have little negotiating power.

The right in britain do not understand the right wing single market is underpinned within europe with the social chapter as a trade off with the left politically.


Remember the countries that used to make up EFTA (european free trade area) had to sign up to more than 80% of the eu rules without any say on them.


57

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 13:28:19
57
preddo53

"...pray do tell me the implications of quitting the EU..."

An admission that you are shooting off your silly mouth about quitting the EU without having thought it through. Much as I anticipated.

58

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 13:33:15
Scottish and Proud, are you racist, you obviously don't like the English and I lay odds you've met very few of them. You need to forget history, what happened 3 hundred years ago happened, neither you or me can change it. Little Englander, am I, sorry, I didn't realise wanting to be independent meant I was a little Englander. By the way, what does Scottish and Proud mean, Are you a little Scotlander.
59

Alan B,

27/06/2009 13:33:32
#preddo53

How would you deal with the economic devastation if the uk was to leave the eu?

Industry invests and locates within the eu to get access to the single market. Outside the eu at the very best we would have to under go a very painful 20/30yrs transition.

An independent london outside the eu could do quite well but not an economy as bid as the uks. To big to niche yourself as a neighbour of the eu like switzerland, and too small to be a rival economy.
60

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 13:35:33
58
Alan B

"I think it is more to do with a parochialist little englander attitude together with an establishment that is still caught up with attitudes from the empire and imperialism."

I totally agree. But I see a distinctive "Anglo" brand of monarchism and attitude to parliamentary sovereignty as being bound up with the things you mention.

Said with all appropriate caveats about generalisation, of course. We are not really talking here about English people, far less the people of England. We are talking about what is generally referred to as the "establishment". This necessarily has implications for the whole culture of England. But this is very different from saying it is characteristic of the people.

61

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 13:37:28
Alan B. I got my figures from Newsnight, apparently, those were the figures of a pole, I don't know if it was Scotland or England, I think it was uk wide.
62

Alan B,

27/06/2009 13:39:27
#preddo53

" Little Englander, am I, sorry, I didn't realise wanting to be independent meant I was a little Englander."

I think you will get accused of that position because you are failing to say why you are anti the eu in any credible way. As you know living in england many are just anti german or anti french etc. Having lived in scotland i was very surprised when i lived in england for a while of the comments that were so openly made regarding the french, germans or europeans as if we were not european.

I think you fail to understand that many of those wanting scotlands independence do so so that scotland can be internationalist in outlook and not preoccuppied with england more inward looking approach as represented by ukip or the bnp and to an extent the tories.

63

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 13:42:46
63
Alan B

"An independent london outside the eu could do quite well but not an economy as bid as the uks. To big to niche yourself as a neighbour of the eu like switzerland, and too small to be a rival economy."

I was hoping preddo53 would prove that he has given at least some consideration to the implications of leaving the EU, even if his ignorance of the EU meant this could never be an informed assessment. But I see you have decided to help him out by pointing out a few facts.

Gracious of you! Although I'm not sure he will be very appreciative.

64

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 27/06/2009 13:44:22
62 preddo
didn't realise wanting to be independent meant I was a little Englander. By the way, what does Scottish and Proud mean, Are you a little Scotlander.

No I am a BIG scotlander ,however it varies dramtatically from your view of other nations and cultures.
I have never believed the Union flag was actualy Scotland's flag , I never lived in a country that had signs in windows saying No Irish or blacks.

I have never believed that every fellow European was either inferior or untrustworthy.

As a Scot I do not have a dislike of people of a different race or colour.
I embrace my fellow citizens of Europe (and the world)and look forward to my newly Independent country being wholehaertedly involved in the process and ethos of the EU.
I do not have a superiority complex ,no need to have that I am after all, Scottish.

65

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 13:45:47
65
preddo53

"I got my figures from Newsnight, apparently, those were the figures of a pole, I don't know if it was Scotland or England, I think it was uk wide."

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue what you are talking about. And yet you presume to lecture others about quitting the EU.



66

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 13:46:31
Alan B. We did have trading partners before we joined the common market, and we did quite well. Just because we pull out of the EU doesn't mean we can't trade with them, we are net importers not exporters.
67

karin Mac,

27/06/2009 13:51:27
65 pole - a long thin inanimate object the bain of unionists who frequently injure themselves on it due to the constant habit of walking about with their eyes shut.


poll - a survey of attitudes.

My poll found that most people think your a numpty.
68

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 13:52:10
Hermit, stop being so personal, there is no need for it,you're becoming tedious, you can't argue because you don't have an argument to make so you resort to insults.
69

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 14:00:29
I get the feeling I'm on a loser here, I hope to God you get independence, if only so you can take back the numpty MPs you keep producing.
70

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 14:05:45
70
preddo53

"We did have trading partners before we joined the common market..."

That was then. This is now. You are talking about returning to a place that no longer exists.

71

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 14:11:56
72
preddo53

"...you don't have an argument..."

We're still waiting for yours. The case for being part of the EU has already been outlined. Time for you to step up to the plate with your argument for quitting. And argument which, to convince those of us who do not think in Daily Mail headlines, will have to demonstrate consideration of the economic and political implications of leaving the EU.

Start whenever you are ready.

If you find the facilities here too restrictive, feel free to go over to www.electrichermit.com so that you can set out your case in full.

72

Darien,

Panama 27/06/2009 14:15:18
#73 preddo: "..so you can take back the numpty MPs you keep producing"

You have a point there. But please don't send the Scots-Unionist-Brit-Nat Quislings back here. Brown will be off to Harvard or Yale no doubt. Others might gite-off to France or Spain, or some other centralist nation-state. But like the Scots Tories used to hate devolution and now lap it up, I expect many of the current politicians will look for a gravy train, even in an independent Scotland.

One term and their out, that's what I say.
73

preddo53,

Leeds 27/06/2009 14:25:43
Hermit I don't read the Daily Mail, Tried it once, didn't like it, dont do the Express either, but you've already made your mind up what kind of person I am so I won't contradict, it's pointless.
74

Electric Hermit,

27/06/2009 14:54:28
77
preddo53

"it's pointless"

Much like your "argument" for quitting the EU.

75

Nicky Tam,

THE FREE NATION OF SCOTLAND 27/06/2009 15:34:41
http://tinyurl.com/knb8ny



Dimbers tells the truth.
76

yoric,

27/06/2009 17:55:14
Same old Cameron, living with the dream that at election time people in Scotland will vote Conservative if he makes the right pro Scottish noises.

When the Tories dont win any seats at the next election in Scotland and only win 1 or 2 in Wales will he then wake up and realise that the Conservative party now only rules in England.

Role on Devolution, the English are sick of subsidising Scotland.
77

morris,

edinburgh 27/06/2009 20:23:04
80 I agree with 98% of what you say of course.I presume the last line is said tongue in cheek of course.

The English may well be sick of "subsidising Scotland" but I wonder how they will feel when they discover they too have been conned and its actually Scotland which has been subsidising The UK of GB & NI?

A bit annoyed I think !
78

John PH,

FiFe 27/06/2009 21:14:24
Cameron, reminds me of a drunk at a party who doesn’t want the party to end, he will plead; stay for awhile it’s cold outside, stay in the warmth. Or threats, such as, you will be on your own with nobody to look after you or your well being, it’s a cold hard world out there, and we will take care of you, or plead, I will be lonely with nobody to look after me, please stay.

The English do not care about Scots, but they care very much about our, Scots-land, otherwise how can there be a map of Britain/England.Without Scotland. England reminds me of a bag of boots open at the top

From the Marquis De La Fayette: for a Nation to be free, it simply wills it.
79

Alan B,

27/06/2009 22:29:22
#preddo53

"We did have trading partners before we joined the common market, and we did quite well"

That remark tends to suggest you have little understanding of trade and the economy.

The uk economy as i said earlier was in relative decline since then end of ww1 compared to other european countries. eg productivity levels etc.

You come across as someone whose argument for leaving if you would actually make one is driven from a purely political point of view and a believe maybe partly misguided about the role of the eu. And you hope without any knowledge or conviction that it will not be too damaging for the economy.

If you look at trade patterns when we joined the eec our trade with the eu countries has grown and the old common wealth fallen away. If we left there is no common wealth anymore that we could and would trade with in any significant way.

The common market was about tarrif free trade. Countries used to put on tarriff charges on to other countries goods to make them more expensive and protect their own produce. Say add 20% for instance. In economic terms the idea behind the common market is free trade brings more prosperity.

The single market was about removing non tarriff barriers to trade. ie government would try to protect their economy by introducing rules and regulations that protect their own companies and industry. Which end in practice breading protectionism and from that lower economic growth, lower employment levels and lower living standards.

Take any example of what could and probably would happen to one industry if we left the eu. Cars. The eu rules mean that a high percentage of a car has to be produced within the eu if it is to be sold within the eu. Rules brought in to protect the eu from japanese cars being exported to the eu. This means that we buy japanese cars largely made in the eu. If the uk pulls out then any japanese or other companies producting cars in the uk would inevitably move production to within the e
80

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 27/06/2009 23:36:10
From the Herald:"...Cameron also admits formally that his party when in power was wrong to oppose devolution and should have paid more attention to the calls for devolved authority during the Thatcher years"

There were NO CALLS FOR DEVOLUTION during the thatcher years. Devolution is a unionist invention, not an invention of the SNP. What was ignored during the Thatcher years was the call for Independence, which also being ignored now by Cameron.
81

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 27/06/2009 23:38:13
Cameron can "concede" what he wants for publicity. Simple thing is he will ignore Scotland. Also from The Herald:

"TORY LEADER David Cameron and Scotland's First Minister, Alex Salmond, have gone to war over the deployment of a new generation of Trident nuclear submarines on the Clyde. Cameron warns the Scottish Government that if the Conservatives win the next election the SNP should not "obstruct" Trident and should accept that the prime minister has a mandate to govern the whole of the UK in reserved areas such as defence.
Salmond however says it will be "perfectly legitimate" for the Scottish Parliament to try to exert influence over what happens in Scotland. In a BBC documentary to mark a decade of devolution, the SNP leader promises to campaign against a Trident replacement at "every available opportunity"
82

Darien,

Panama 27/06/2009 23:48:05
Cameron says: "..the SNP should ....accept that the prime minister has a mandate to govern the whole of the UK in reserved areas such as defence."

Whit a plonka. Dave Boy will have no Scottish mandate to do anything in the name of Scotland and its people. Only a few fools in Scotland will vote for his party of Westminster spivs, and ditto New Labour. They and the FibDums need to be shown the door. Scots don't need ot want his colonial governance with "respect". What the Scots need is their nation back.
83

Liber Respublica de Scotia,

28/06/2009 00:04:31
Yoric,

"Role on Devolution, the English are sick of subsidising Scotland." So, does that mean that they're sick of pilfering Scotland's natural resources, and tossing a modicum of the profits from their sales back to the rightful Scottish owners through The Barnett Formula, a.k.a. The Barnett Protocol for the Restriction of Scottish Revenue?

By your assessment, they must also be getting fairly sick of raising taxation of Scottish goods and services.

Do you really expect to be taken seriously?
84

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 28/06/2009 04:16:46
#18 Dunedin
Look forward to your theisis. On my part, I look forward to the Referendum on Independence. The english are scared ridged, but thankfully it has nothing to do with them. INDEPENDENCE AT ANY COST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
85

Charley,

Europe 28/06/2009 12:21:45
88 Scotindy - just a fews questions "why do you live in LA if Scotland means so much to you?" Are you even Scottish or some plastic jock who wears tartan underpants to bed? Do you have an alarm clock that wakes you up shouting "Freedom". If you are an American or actually are Scottish, when are you going to give the USA back to the Native Americans and stop raping their land, taking their riches and treating them like 3rd class citizens?
86

Charley,

Europe 28/06/2009 12:27:17
Liber, Darien, For Scotlands Future et al, you guys are really quite, well odd. I truly hope that the likes of you don't actually live in Scotland. You are really so, so, wide of the mark of how the majority of people feel and articulate those feelings. Scotindy is just a plastic jock with ancient maps of Caledonia on his wall and I suspect a tacky coat of arms....so quite harmless.
87

Darien,

Panama 28/06/2009 13:12:22
#90 Charley: "you guys are really quite, well odd."

For wanting our nation to be recognised and respected as a nation, like all other nations? That makes us odd? In the eyes of a British Nationalist maybe, whose raison detre is to prevent Scottish nationhood. Are you a FibDum, perchance?

You might care to note that the economic umbilical chord between Holyrood and Westminster now sucks. That's as good a reason as any to cut it. Freedom is another reason, of course.
88

Charley,

Europe 28/06/2009 23:47:00
Darien - our nation is recognised and respected. Who does not? The Chileans? The Ukranians? Um, the Tongans? The bogeyman? I am not a brit-nat or any nat...I am a person who lives in the country who certainly does not feel like I live in a colony, am oppressed, am living in a slum deprived of healthcare or feel persecuted if, god forbid, I head south of the border...you an your kind do not speak or articulate for the majority of persones who live in this country. You and your pals are, raving nats...blinded, unable to make a un-biased judgement. Salmonds brown shirts. Thats how I and the majority of my 30 something, middle of the road friends, well, think. And your rantings on these pages just show that...
89

Charley,

still europe 28/06/2009 23:48:26
apols. typos.....
90

morris,

edinburgh 18/09/2009 18:08:05
Cameron concedes the Tories were wrong to oppose devolution.Yes but for all the wrong reasons!
He says this because his party are almost cannon fodder north of the border and are only still existing because of the PR system which they were also opposed to!

The Tories represent the apparent right of the South of England to impose its views on Scotland who are fundamentally opposed to everything they stand for,but are numerically disadvantaged as only 9% of the total electorate and many of them vote for the Labour or LID parties each of which guarantee a Tory government will rule in Scotland.

Now if that's not an act of futility I don't know what is!

We should never indulge in ethnic jokes.

We are one!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

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

 
 

More Devolution

More Devolution >>

Today's Vote

What should be done to cut down on food waste at the Scottish Parliament?
They should give it out to homeless charities
Open the MSPs’ restaurant up to the public
They should reduce the number of items on the menu

Web Links:

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.