Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 22nd November 2008

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.

My ministers will explain themselves to Holyrood, says Cameron



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: 30 September 2008
MINISTERS in a future Tory government would be compelled to appear before Holyrood committees to explain their policies to Scotland, David Cameron pledged yesterday.
The Tory leader hopes to build a relationship of "respect" with the Scottish Parliament as he knows that he is likely to have few Conservative MPs north of the Border after the next general election.

This would involve UK ministers opening themsel
ves up to scrutiny from MSPs on a wide range of issues if it is considered "appropriate".

When Labour controlled the Scottish Parliament, ministers such as Peter Hain, then Minister for Europe, and Elliot Morley, then fisheries minister, did appear – though Gordon Brown, when Chancellor, and more senior trade ministers refused.

The Tories claim that Labour's period in office was marked by far more refusals than acceptances, a position they are determined to reverse.

Mr Cameron, in an interview with BBC Scotland at the Tory party conference, said: "I want to make devolution work better. I would like to see ministers in any government I lead actually appearing in front of committees in Holyrood if that was appropriate."

Despite appearing to leave open the possibility of ministers still being able to refuse demands to appear in Edinburgh, a senior Scottish Tory source indicated that Mr Cameron was effectively rewriting current convention.

The source said: "It's the 'respect' agenda in action. There will be an expectation that they will appear rather than an expectation that they won't. It's a reversal of the last nine years."

In the interview, Mr Cameron admitted that his party would struggle to add to the sole MP it has in Scotland. But he rejected suggestions that a Tory government at Westminster would merely build support for the SNP if the party in power in London had little support in Scotland.

Mr Cameron said: "Of course, I want us to win more seats in Scotland but I'm a realist. I know that however well we do, we will still face challenges in Scotland. If I become prime minister, people in Scotland should know I will reach out to anyone and everyone in Scotland who wants to make the United Kingdom work.

"Working with the First Minister, whoever that is, because if Alex Salmond thinks the election of a Conservative government will somehow help him break up the Union, he has got another think coming. I'm a passionate believer in the United Kingdom and I want Scotland and England to stay in the United Kingdom together and I will do what is necessary to see that happen."

Mr Cameron, who will make his main address to the conference tomorrow, said he had supported cross-party working in Westminster over schooling and the Trident nuclear missiles, and "we have got to have that sort of grown-up attitude to working together in Scotland".

He went on: "Devolution working means that you, as the British prime minister, have to accept that there are people with different political views who might be running the assembly in Wales, who might be running the parliament in Scotland, and you have to work with them."

Despite the Tories polling above 20 per cent in opinion polls in Scotland, election experts think they will struggle to turn that into constituencies. The seats thought most likely to fall to the party are Edinburgh South, East Renfrewshire and Dumfries and Galloway, all currently held by Labour. But the party expected to make the biggest gains in the event of a Labour collapse is the SNP.

Mr Cameron said: "At heart what I believe in is giving people more power and responsibility over their lives. I think that chimes in very much with what people in Scotland would like to see. They have had too much big bossy interfering Labour government and I think they would like a change."





The full article contains 645 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 29 September 2008 10:05 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Conservative Party
 
1

Neil Waugh,

Old Strathcona 30/09/2008 01:15:44
I think it would be a wonderful idea for the British ambassador to meet with the Scottish prime minister. Present his credentials, all that horse's @ass stuff.
If he wants to bring along a few Westminster ministers the more the merrier.
Just as it is always done among civilized sovereign nations.
At least wee Cameron is thinking ahead.
2

Weegiewarbler,

Docked 30/09/2008 01:44:35
Interesting statements:

Why did the interviewer not ask for definitions of these comments in particular:
+++++++
"Scotland should know I will reach out to anyone and everyone in Scotland who wants to make the United Kingdom work."

So if Scotland elects to dissolve the union, or elect or retain an SNP government - you won't work with them?
+++++++
if Alex Salmond thinks the election of a Conservative government will somehow help him break up the Union, he has got another think coming.

Mr. Cameron - How exactly do you intend to thwart what may very well be the wishes of the Scottish electorate?
This doesn't sound very democratic to say the least now does it?
+++++++++
I'm a passionate believer in the United Kingdom and I want Scotland and England to stay in the United Kingdom together and I will do what is necessary to see that happen."

Does that include putting the army on the streets? Attempting to arrest the democratically elected government - attempting to dissolve Holyrood - using secret service personell to undermine and influence elections - blatant warping of a supposedly free media - can you explain EXACTLY the meaning of this statement?
++++++
That'll do - but nice of a reporter had the integrity to ask for an explanation.
3

Guga II,

Rockall 30/09/2008 03:52:15
#2 Weegiewarbler.

"Does that include putting the army on the streets?"

It wouldn't be the first time. The last time the English government did that, they confined all Scottish troops to barracks, and sent in 10,000 English troops, and tanks.
4

somerferg,

perth 30/09/2008 04:57:31

Blah, blah, blah - the usual nonsense from the tory party which all adds up to "crumbs from the master's table" - NO THANKS.
5

Tatties ower the side,

Johannesburg 30/09/2008 04:59:14
Cameron reminds me of that old chestnut.....

"How can you tell when a politician is lying?"


"It's when his lips are moving!"
6

Bejjy,

30/09/2008 07:01:08
#3 Gaga

More misinformed tripe from you; British troops and tanks maybe but not English troops and tanks.
7

Royster,

30/09/2008 07:20:03
Oh perh...leeeese. Of course the Tories will do this once they are in power. I'm a tory by nature and I can assure you this is horsesh#t.
8

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 30/09/2008 07:28:08
If only Salmond and his "cabinet secretaries" would do the same and explain their numerous broken promises to the Scottish Parliament. Scotland deserves far better.
9

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 30/09/2008 07:29:03
7

And most nationalists are "Tory by nature".
10

Hugo of Garven,

30/09/2008 07:31:48
" . . if it is considered "appropriate"."

Who decides if it is appropriate?

11

eric,

30/09/2008 07:33:11
pass
12

donald,

glasgow 30/09/2008 07:36:35
Cameron shows more concern for Scotland than Broon the Brit, which would not be hard.
13

Macuistean,

Isle of Tiree 30/09/2008 07:37:16
.......if Alex Salmond thinks the election of a Conservative government will somehow help him break up the Union, he has got another think coming.

Alex Salmond won't break up the Union, that will be done by voting tory. Cameron just doesn't get it; The tories are detested in Scotland and when England votes tory Scotland will start the journey to independence.
14

Nell,

30/09/2008 07:50:12
"MINISTERS in a future Tory government would be compelled to appear before Holyrood committees to explain their policies to Scotland, David Cameron pledged yesterday."
Will that include explaining their previous policies from tory governments past?
Now that would be very interesting to hear someone trying to explain total neglect of a country.
15

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 30/09/2008 07:55:29
13 Macuistean
Apart from the poll tax which the Tories removed anyway, which specific Tory acts/policies would or should an independent Scotland repeal?
16

Macuistean,

Isle of Tiree 30/09/2008 08:05:10
16 Ugly George

You are joking.
17

Guga II,

Rockall 30/09/2008 08:07:53
#6.

You are showing your ignorance of history. Check up on what happened when the Red Clydesiders were around. It was English troops and tank, and all the Scottish troops were cnfined to barracks.

With a name like yours, I can see why you are ignorant.
18

Nell,

30/09/2008 08:19:47
No. 6:- Troops based in the city's Maryhill barracks were locked inside their post, with English troops and tanks sent into the city to control unrest and extinguish any revolution that should break out. No Scottish troops were deployed, with the government fearing that fellow Scots, soldiers or otherwise, would go over to the workers' side if a revolutionary situation developed in Glasgow. English troops were transported from England and stationed in Glasgow specifically to combat this possible scenario.
19

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 08:26:17
And going by past experiances what exactly is a Tory pre election promise worth these days?
20

Ananurhing,

30/09/2008 08:27:43
"if Alex Salmond thinks the election of a Conservative government will somehow help him break up the Union, he has got another think coming"

If Cameron thinks Scottish constitutional matters have anything to do with him, other than as an observer, he's in for a shock! One MP don't make a mandate!
21

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 08:28:17
9

Yes of course they are and you have a list to prove it dont you?
22

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 08:28:18
So in summary, Cameron said nothing, committed to nothing, and got positive press. Hmm.
23

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 08:44:25
24

Nothing new there then from the unionist press.
And yet another indication of the similarities between New Labour and the Conservatives.
You couldnt squeeze the edge of an American express card between their ideals.
24

Boy Wonder,

30/09/2008 08:44:32
The only Tory I have any time for is long dead ... and that's all of them who've had the decency to die!

And my former party of choice isn't far behind them.

Cameron's "ministers" will have nothing to answer for in Scotland .... cos they'll have nothing to do with our government.
25

Ananurhing,

30/09/2008 08:45:13
#24 Duncan

I think Cameron's comments were meant to be a broadside. Albeit a halfhearted anally clipped effort bereft of conviction.

BTW apologies for calling you a t*rd yesterday. Your own particular nastiness came out of nowhere and took me by surprise. I know it's just part of your character and I shouldn't have risen to it.
26

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 08:50:23
16

Well we could reverse the growing trend towards privatising the NHS.
We can renationalise Dental surgeries
We can reduce VAT or even abolish VAT altogether.
We can renationalise the utility companies.
Get rid of PFI.
Cut back on defence spending in line with our european neighbours.
Abolish Nukes.

Thats just a few no doubt others can add to this all day.
27

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 08:59:49
#27 Delightful - even when apologising for insulting me you insult me. I'm sorry that you think it is "nasty" to ask you to bring forward evidence for an unfounded claim that you made (which inevitably you failed to do). Perhaps the lesson is not to make unfounded claims.
28

JayJay,

Right here 30/09/2008 09:00:16
I wonder if anyone in the mainstream press might take Lord Snooty Cameron to task over his brass neck on party funding? Last night's Dispatches Programme on Channel 4 managed to expose the same old bogeymen bankrolling the Conservative party from offshore tax havens. £50k buys you a seat at the table with Dave and "policymakers" apparantly.
So much for openness and transparancy. This eejit is getting a free run at number 10 with no substantial policies, no real track record with the strings being pulled by the likes of Michael Ashcroft.
Dave, the old etonian, has made much of his everyman credentials and, like past eejits of the ilk of Jonathan Aitken, he is quick to claim the moral high ground. I won't be holding my breath waiting for the press to nail him on this issue.
29

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:09:03
#31 90 years is nothing - most of that lot (Guga and his mates) are obsessed with things that happened 300 years ago...
30

brownlie,

30/09/2008 09:15:58
32 Duncan

Do you think that Guga and his mates are not concerned about the dreadful state the UK Government has left this country in in the present day?

What they are pointing out is that there is a precedent for heavy-handed treatment of all those who oppose government policies.
31

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:17:24
30

Thats nothing new the Tories and New labour are both backed by undisclosed and hidden funding sometimes backed by the same sources. All their policies are bought and paid for in advance and that isnt new.
Why do you think new Labour chose to abolish the 10p tax rate instead of going for a higher tax bracket for the super rich to raise more cash?
Why do you think New Labour introduced IR35 in order to curb small companies to the advantage of bigger corporations?
And this will continue until political parties are funded by the public purse ONLY.
32

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:19:01
#34 Yep. And there's a precedent for the burning of Catholics, the ruling of the country by the French and a whole host of other things. Do you expect them all to recur?
33

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:19:38
32

We are exactly where we are today because of events which happened over 300 years ago.
Pivotal moments in history ripple out over millenia.
34

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:22:04
36

Well yes actually dont you keep up with events in Iraq and Afganistan?
For the burning of catholics you can substitute the burning of Muslims and for the country ruled by the French you can substitute the Americans and British.
Same ol same ol.
35

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:22:06
#35 Hmm, can we think of an example of this closer to home? What about a donation of £750,000 from a homophobic businessman which was directly followed by the dropping of bus re-regulation from a Scottish party's manifesto against the wishes of its party conference?

I completely agree, by the way. Political parties should be funded by the public purse. But there is NO major party in Scotland or elsewhere which can criticise the current arrangements without criticising itself. Especially not the party currently in power.
36

brownlie,

30/09/2008 09:22:59
31 Janis B

As a reporter at the miners' strike I can assure you that the police were used against miners. Miners, and other journalists, were often subjected to heavy-handed treatment when they were nowhere near strike breakers. Motorists travelling in the area were turned back and refused entry into the vicinity even though they had legitimate reasons for being there. TV cameras were refused entry into areas where this brutality took place.
37

john z,

edinburgh 30/09/2008 09:24:34
Does anybody in Scotland fall for this guff?? Never forget, the Tories vehemently opposed the setting up of the second Scottish parliament.

What is most frighteneing is Camerons determination to use all available means to keep the united kingdom together. What will that entail?? MI5 spooks 'fixing' elections, planting 'stories in the media', doing another McCrae, with a bullet to the head of anybody who believes in Scottish independence.

Oh, Mr.Cameron, please spell out how you will work to defy the democratic will of the Scottish people. Will we have internment for SNP supporters?? Do you want civil war??

For three hundred years the people of Scotland have been fighting to get rid of the abusive english government, and no english Tory is going to tell scotland what it can and cannot do.

Where is his mandate (except in an old colonial tory philosophy) to do anything in Scotland. How many MP's would he expect in Scotland 1, 2. Hardly the authority to do anything.

I suggest Cameron should really focus on England. He will have NO MANDATE from Scotland to do anything up here. Cameron will have no authority in Scotland. Period.

Unless he wants a war.......
38

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:28:27
39

Total garbage the policy of dropping the bus re-regulation was policy long before the donation was given.

All the parties can and should critise the present funding arrangement and give themselves much needed credibility with the public.
But of course some parties benefit much much more than other from illegal dodgy and hidden donations than others do. And it shows in there policies.
And in the number of Police investigations.
39

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:31:03
#37 The great danger is the misappropriation of history for purposes like yours - the stirring up of nationalist sentiment. The ripples which reach us today are illusory. There was never a moment when England oppressed Scotland, and the dishonesty of Nationalist representations of history is one of the reasons I dismiss nationalist politics. Even if there is a core of logic, it is dressed up with so much false rhetoric as to make it indistinguishable from a lie.
40

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:32:33
#42 No it wasn't! As a matter of fact it has never stopped being SNP party policy! It was just dropped from the manifesto - AFTER Souter's donation.
41

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:34:25
43

the misappropriation of history??

How is that even possible the same sources of history are available to all to read and interpret for themselves. You cant force anybody else to believe something you believe especially if they can judge the matter for themselves.
Hence when you try to spin yer posts with "Historical facts" we can jump down yer throat and correct you.
42

Alan B,

30/09/2008 09:35:19
Camerons comments should be welcomed. Given the immature and condesending approach of labour in londons to the Scottish parliament and Brown in particular, it is good to see that Cameron showing some respect to the Scottish parliament. Given the tories poor record in relation to Scotland we will have to see whether he lives up to his words.

By compelling mininsters in westminster to explain decisions to the devolved parliaments it will forse these ministers to understand the different arrangements in different parts of the UK.

The home office in particular under Charles Clarke seems to have a particularly contemputous and ignorant attitude to the fact that his department had implication in Scotland. Part of the problem off course was the poor devolution arrangements that fudge many areas of power.
43

Alan B,

30/09/2008 09:36:22
sorry "Charles Clarke seemed" i know he is gone now.
44

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:36:36
44

And if the SNP hadnt kept that particular manifesto promise wouldnt you be all over the blogs crying about it as another broken promise?
45

Micropacer,

30/09/2008 09:36:42
Reading views from clueless hysterical Nationlists on these forums would almost make me NOT vote for independence should I get the chance. I wouldnt let that stop me voting yes but I really do despair. Do some of you acutally believe the utter garbage you post?

I expect it of rabib Unionists by why are there Nationalists that are on the opposite extreme?

Cameron is trying to engage with Scotland again - no more or less. So many people trying to read into something that isnt there. The Tories are irrelevant and so is Cameron but there is nothing underhand about what he is proposing. Yet so many twisted and warped minds cannot see the woods for the trees.

Troops on the streets?

I give up I really do. Why dont some of you get out and interact with real people in the real world? You certainly need a healthy does of reality.
46

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:37:41
47

Whoa are you forgetting Belfast? Troops on the streets at every riot?
47

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:39:56
50

There have been "troops on the streets" of NI for the last couple of decades because some of the population desired Independence.
48

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:43:06
53

In what way? British troops on British streets during riots and armed to the teeth with live ammo.
49

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:44:34
#45 Of course it's possible! It happens every day. People choose who to trust, they do not go running for reference works. And anyway, much as you do, if it suits someone to believe a falsehood they will happily deny the truth of even the most reliable of sources - your bizarre assertions about oil reserves in the UK versus Norway yesterday was an example of that. The facts were clearly set against you, but you maintained your position on the basis of a fundamental mistrust of the factual information.

Religious belief is based on exactly the same thing. Historical facts are brushed aside when they do not gel with the tenets of faith.

And here we have Nationalists claiming oppression by the English - when in fact the union of Scotland and England came with far less oppression for real Scots than the decades and centuries preceding it!
50

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:47:18
55

"if it suits someone to believe a falsehood they will happily deny the truth of even the most reliable of sources"

I certainly cant argue with that FACT I see the evidence every day in your posts.

But then that is your personal choice it isnt being forced upon you by denying you access to your own sources.

51

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:49:10
55

Religious beliefs are based on faith not the interpretation of historical documentation.
PEOPLE CHOOSE TO BELIEVE THEY CANT BE FORCED TO BELIEVE.
52

Alan B,

30/09/2008 09:49:23
#Duncan in Edinburgh

"There was never a moment when England oppressed Scotland"

That maybe depends on how you define oppressed. And yes when people say England to a large degree they are talking about the political leaders.

The act of union was against the popular will of the scottish people, brought about by threats and bribes.

If a country brings in economic sanctionts to another is that oppression or is that the right of a country to trade with whoever it wants. Given that the empire was build on military force and Scotland was told it could not trade with that empire outwith the union is that oppression.

However that is distant history and really show not matter to todays decisions. Look at more recent areas of oppression would be
-the hiding of the McCrone report: this was the deliberate sepression of an economic document by the uk government at the time to prevent Scotland walking away for the union. The labour government at the time were talking about economic disaster for scotland if we walked away while their own report suggested economic disaster for england and the transformation of scotland into one of the richest countries in the world.
- following on from that would be the general propoganda and control of the news. Even recently labour pulled the devolution of broadcasting as a Scottish news might play into the hands of nats. off course that was not really England but labours Scots. We critise the governemtn propoganda of the news by say Russia but we all know the BBC is very southern union with a centre left political agenda.
-the undemocratic referendum of 79. As it was completely and utterly undemocratic and a complete disgrace (something i will never forgive the labour party and s*** that imposed that).
- the 17yrs of tory rule preventing a scottish parliament despite the yes vote in 79.
53

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:51:01
#56 So you agree with me that history is misappropriated on a regular basis then? Think it through next time before leaping in like you did in #45. I'm unsurprised that you think people you disagree with are responsible for it, while I think people I disagree with are responsible for it.

However, with regard to the act of union, I know I'm right that nationalists misappropriate and misrepresent that period in history on an almost daily basis, simply to further their contemporary ends.
54

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:52:13
#58 The alternative to the act of union was rule by France. Was that the will of the Scottish people? Prove it.
55

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:52:50
New Duncan

"There was never a moment when England oppressed Scotland"

So Duncan denies the entire existance of Edward the First "The hammer of the Scots".

You see New Duncan you cant force historical facts onto people.
56

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 09:55:08
59

"56 So you agree with me that history is misappropriated on a regular basis then"

No I dont many people may try like yourself for instance but they dont get away with it as has been amply displayed this morning.

57

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:55:30
#62 Oh dear. I didn't say there weren't wars between Scotland and England. Do try to keep up.
58

Alan B,

30/09/2008 09:55:59
#Micropacer

I welcome what Cameron says. But I think you have to realise that many still do not trust the tories due to what happened previously.

When is a politician genuine and when will they actually do what they say?
59

Alan B,

30/09/2008 09:57:29
#64 Duncan in Edinburgh

If you say there were wars between Scotland and England. If they were started by the larger neighbour then that is oppression. A big nation bullying a small one is oppression.
60

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 09:59:48
#63 You are a little premature in announcing your victory - it's a common trait for you I notice. You have won no argument here.

Even if you consider the regular attempts at misappropriation of history to be failures, they still happen.
61

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:01:12
60

So that is the history of NI in a nutshell is it?
That is what you are going to use to justify the precence of armed British troops in NI for over 20 years suppressing riots?
completely ignoring the historical fact that the troops were called in to NI in the first place to protect the Catholic minority from the Protestant majority? the IRA reformed to become the Provisional IRA in order to protect Catholic communities from protestant terrorists trying to burn them out before the troops were called in.
Lets not even get into the "GERRYMANDERING" of the 6 counties in the first place.
62

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 10:02:26
#66 Oh for pity's sake! THAT is precisely the misappropriation of history I'm talking about. At the time of the "hammer of the Scots" Scotland was an ally/puppet state of France! Of course France itself had been the ruler of England just a few centuries beforehand. This notion that Scotland stood alone against the terrible English is PRECISELY the sort of history re-writing about which I have been talking.
63

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:03:56
67

"Even if you consider the regular attempts at misappropriation of history to be failures, they still happen"

When a misappropriation fails then it doesnt occur does it? or are you now going to get into 20 to 30 posts of semantics to cover your bullsh*t again?
64

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:05:10
64

And wars dont oppress who exactly?
65

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 10:06:16
#70 STOP. For once, just stop, and instead of screaming and bawling, look at what I have written and try to respond rationally to it.
66

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:08:00
72 New Duncan.

You post irrational garbage and cry foul when its pointed out rationally?
Not a troll then?
67

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:10:26
72

I am just waiting for you to switch over to a rational new logon account.
68

WL,

livingston 30/09/2008 10:15:08
Scotland will be independent before there will be a Conservative & Unionist Party government in Westminster!
69

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 10:15:17
#73 I am not being irrational, and for the umpteenth time, I have only one login.

Your assertion that "when a misappropriation fails then it doesn't occur" is mistaken, because failure is judged only by each individual's response to it. There will be many people taken in by the misrepresentation of English "oppression" of Scots in the 16 and 1700s, despite the wide availability of historical texts describing the period accurately.
70

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:20:32
What truly cracks me about this New Labour approach to propaganda using cybertrolls on the blogs is their cybertrolls are arguing and insulting ordinary voters when they should be trying to persuade them to vote for new labour and not the SNP.
They are supposed to be presenting reasonable argument and trying to expose where they think the SNP are going wrong but instead they have taken upon themselves to try and wind up as many ordinary voters as they can by getting involved in slanging matches.
Do they think this is what the New Labour party had in mind when they kicked this off?
I think they need a whole rethink rehash and recruitment drive to get new cybertrolls above the age of 15.
71

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 10:22:14
#78 More diversion. I am not being paid by the Labour party or anyone else. Indeed, it would be a very very odd thing for Labour to pay for, as you yourself say. So let's drop this whole ridiculous set of allegations please. They are baseless.
72

Alan B,

30/09/2008 10:23:30
#Duncan

Scotland aligned itself with France partially to protect itself from England.

You seem to be denial about anything to do with anything that does not fit in to your views that the union is good and England have always been a good neighbour to us.

73

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:23:32
77

The point is Duncan if they are "taken in" its because the choose to be "taken in" we are back to belief again and faith.
I prefer to look at it as convinced not taken in.
Which is where you go wrong every time you obviously mistake "taking in" with "convincing" which shows in every post.
74

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:24:56
79

Then its very very strange why you post as if you are instead of as a hardworking IT something in Edinburgh would post.
75

Alan B,

30/09/2008 10:26:15
#Duncan

So you are saying it was ok for England to attack Scotland becuase Scotland for protectionist and religious reasons allied itself to France.

Is that not the bush doctrine if you are not with us you are against us.

76

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 10:27:22
#80 I don't deny that. It would be ridiculous to suggest that England was always a good neighbour to Scotland, and I never have.

Please review what specifically I have said before criticising me for what I haven't said.
77

Alan B,

30/09/2008 10:28:11
#Duncan

Do you think the British empire going round the world and running them by force and killing them if they resisted was also a good thing.

You are a colonialist and imperialist at heart.

Rule Britainia
78

Yr Awel,

Here & There 30/09/2008 10:29:44
Alan B 58

When talking about the McCrone report, why not mention pp. 16-17 (available on the Net for everyone to see and ponder!). They make very interesting reading: they simply explain that while the economic case for independence could be made, there still remained to make the social and political case - NO LESS! - for the
breaking up of the Union.
Frankly, after all these years, I still cannot understand why the then Labour government opposed the publication; indeed, it would have helped us focus on the real issue: independence = improved democracy or not? Which is precisely a question of a POLITICAL nature. Put differently, it would read: how much benefit can WE, not Scotland the territory, but each and every individual in real life inhabiting the said territory (long live diversity!), possibly derive from it. Now this is a question you cannot answer unless you go for consensus (a halfway-house, a compromise, call whatever you will), which rules out any move supported by just a section of the population, however big...
The hiding of the McCrone report? A missed opportunity for Unionists!
79

Ewan M,

30/09/2008 10:30:30
More Nationalist rantings.....a sensible policy by Cameron, good on him.
80

Alan B,

30/09/2008 10:31:07
#84 Duncan

Off course i review what you say. I just disagree with it.

You ask me to review but then you come out with things I did not say in post in #69. Accusing me of WRONGLY misrepresenting history.
81

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:31:42
75

And what if a democratic vote for independence is denied? what if a democratic referendum is denied?
What if the SNP win more than 30 Scottish seats in Westminster and declare a mandate to negotiate independence is denied?
Do you think the Tories or New Labour would hesitate to put troops on the streets if the people being denied their democratic rights decide to riot?
And do you think the US would object when they themselves regularly put troops on their streets during riots?
82

Yeah1,

30/09/2008 10:34:06
#76

"Scotland will be independent before there will be a Conservative & Unionist Party government in Westminster!"

So you think labour are going to win the general election in 2010 then?

Even if there is a referendum in 2010 and that referendum votes yes to independence, it will take at least 3-5 years for Scotland to become fully independent after that, so I think its safe to say you are wrong, unless labour somehow manage to win the next election.
83

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:34:11
Just Like I predicted New Duncan wants to argue semantics rathar than issues or facts.
Of course he is not a Labour party political troll.
Soon to be replaced again because he doesnt understand his remit.
84

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 10:34:29
#83 and #85 No and no. I am a realist. That is what differentiates me from you, and from suchaparcel. I am not taken in by nationalist sentiment, whether British nationalist or Scottish nationalist.

In #83 you refer to England attacking Scotland. Are you familiar with the fact that Scotland also attacked England? Why do you persist in presenting the history of those two nations in such one-sided terms?
85

Ananurhing,

30/09/2008 10:35:13
Duncan in Edinburgh.

From the 26th June
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/features/Oilobsessed-SNP-figures-simply-do.4223673.jp

Here is where Gray claims that even with control over oil revenues, an independent Scotland would run a serious fiscal defecit. Which we all know is complete tosh.
Forgive me for presuming that a serious unionist such as yourself would have seen this, or at least be aware of Gray's spin on the matter.
I now await your apology for your accusation that I fabricated this.
Apologies to everyone else for going off subject.
86

Duncan in Edinburgh,

30/09/2008 10:36:25
#91 I've asked you before to stop trying to close down discussions with this tactic of misrepresenting me. Stop it please.
87

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 30/09/2008 10:36:37
87 Ewan
Many people seem to think that the Tories will set upon some sort of vendetta against Scotland if they are elected. I think that they might be surprised. I think their approach is more likely to be a hands off appraoch along the lines of if you want to do that go ahead and take responsibility for your own actions.
88

morris,

edinburgh 30/09/2008 10:36:52
......if Alex Salmond thinks the election of a Conservative government will somehow help him break up the Union, he has got another thing coming.

This sounds like a threat to me!You could interpret this in many ways and I dont like the one that keeps on rearing its ugly head!

There is no doubt that our village idiots will waken up and to their surprise find Cameron in no 10.
His majority will be at least 100 seats and maybe could stretch to between 150 and 200 as things look currently.
Labour are finished that is a certainty.

We will hear the usual "The Tories got in because of SNP votes" and all those one brain cell Labour voters will nod in agreement and go back to looking at the pictures in the Daily Retard.

There is no doubt that once it has penetrated their thick skulls that THEY elected Cameron into Scotland that the UK will break in two.
The real question is when will it get into their thick skulls?
They did exactly this for 18 years and got Thatcher into the bargain.

Stupid is a compliment!

At least Tory voters elected a government. Labour voters go to elect an opposition ONLY.

What's really sad is that half of Scotland cannot work this out!
VOTE LABOUR (or Lib Dem) GUARANTEE A TORY GOVERNMENT imposes itself on Scotland.

Any body who backs a horse with no legs ( e.g New Labour) really needs to waken up.

LABOUR CANNOT WIN
Why do we have to go there to know it exists?

Remove the Tories permanently VOTE SNP and remove SCOTLAND from their reach.The ONLY answer.
89

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:36:55
92

If yer not taken in by sentiment then where does your convictions come from? a box?
90

Alan B,

30/09/2008 10:37:20
#Yr Awel

My regarding the McCrone report was it suppression for political expediency.

The supression of information in the 70 by the civil service and thier political masters was quite rife. eg Bernard Ingam etc.

The McCrone report did say Scotland would be better of economically becuase of oil if we went independent. The problem was labour publically said the very opposite. As for social and political issues that is not really the scope of an economic report. They are things the public should balance up when deciding independence.

The fact was the atmosphere at the time suggested Scotland could go independent. Labour and whitehall supressed info to try to swing the debate. A undemocratic referendum also was used with promises of a scottish assembly.

Was it not Tony Benn labour enegy minister who said scotland could not be trusted with oil and would just squander it.
91

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:39:20
95

Thats always a possibility but that possiblity belays their past record which also shows they are willing to say and promise anything pre election and deliver none of it.
92

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:43:47
94

Ok done. Now lets see you get back on topic as a hard working IT something in Edinburgh as opposed to a New Labour party cyber troll which of course youre not.
93

Alan B,

30/09/2008 10:44:13
#Ugly George

Do you really think people think that scots think the tories will run a vendetta against Scotland?

More likely they think tory piorities are not Scotlands priorities. That having the tories run scotland with very little representation in Scotland will be difficult to democratically justify.

Labour have also botched the arrangments for the scottish parliament. It will be interesting how Cameron deals with the fudging of so many powers.

94

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 30/09/2008 10:46:15
98 Alan B
I know that the report was suppressed but the information on which it was based was readily available and their was nothing to stop other groups(eg SNP) commissioning their own analysis.

I remember at the time (I'm old enough) there was much speculation on the issues dealt with in the report and people were expressing similar views to McCrone over possible outcomes. I do think, therefore, that the suppression of the report is not as important as many consider.

One has to remember also, that the report was a projection. It was not a analysis of a current situation. Did McCrone foresee the collapse of oil price in the late eighties/early nineties?
95

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 30/09/2008 10:47:44
101

I would like to see the difference between the Tory new powers for Scotland proposals compared to New Labours proposals. Are they advocating the same power transfers or do they have different versions?
96

Alan B,

30/09/2008 10:48:50
#Duncan in Edinburgh

A realist is not someone that denies history for political expediency.

The fact is England did oppress Scotland historically. The British empire did oppress much of the rest of the world. Imperialism and colonialism were wrong and they were at the heart of most expansionism