Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Sunday, 20th July 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 Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

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

Salmond challenges Scots independence opponents



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: 26 March 2008
FIRST Minister Alex Salmond today challenged opponents of independence to put their alternative plan to the voters in a referendum.
And he held out the prospect of a three-way choice where the electorate would be asked to rank separation, further devolution or keeping the status quo in order of preference.

Launching the second phase of the SNP's National Conversation on Scotl
and's constitutional future, Mr Salmond said there was a consensus that the current powers of the Scottish Parliament were not enough. But he warned any bid to hand powers back to Westminster was a "non-starter."

Speaking to an audience of around 120 leaders of "Civic Scotland" at Edinburgh University's Pollock Halls, he said since the establishment of the Scottish Parliament had been decided by a referendum, any major change to devolution also required a referendum. Yesterday, the opposition parties at Holyrood launched their Scottish Constitutional Commission chaired by former chief medical officer Sir Kenneth Calman, to look at more powers for the Parliament.

Mr Salmond said: "There is a broad acceptance across the entire political spectrum that what we have is not enough and that Scotland wants, needs and desires greater decision-making responsibility vested in our Parliament.

"I have already said as First Minister I am happy to test support for enhanced devolution alongside support for independence."

And he continued: "I say to those who oppose the restoration of Scottish independence that just as I respect absolutely their right to hold that view, so in return I feel able to require of them a clear alternative which can be put on a ballot paper and held up to public scrutiny and be available for decision by the Scottish people."

During a question and answer session with the audience, which included representatives from Scotland's universities, businesses, trade unions, churches and voluntary groups, Mr Salmond indicated he was happy to consider three options on the referendum ballot paper – independence, enhanced devolution and the status quo.

He said if such a referendum were held, voters would be asked to rank the options in order of preference by writing one, two or three against them.

He added: "I'm pretty confident people in Scotland could manage three choices on a ballot paper."

Mr Salmond said the plan was to introduce legislation for a referendum in 2010 and hold the vote before the next Scottish Parliament elections in 2011.

He said: "The people of Scotland are sovereign. The Scottish Parliament is their parliament. The right to choose the future of this country is the people of Scotland's right."

He said he hoped the National Conversation would come to "the right conclusion" but added: "The debate in itself is a good thing."





The full article contains 453 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 26 March 2008 1:01 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Silence of the Yams,

26/03/2008 13:24:46
I think it's time to run our own affairs. The union had it uses in the empire days, but they are long gone. Post war, the Union has been of little value to Scotland. Time to rise and be a nation again.
2

Farky,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 13:25:50
Looking forward to the referendum. I have little doubt that the Scottish people have now realised (or beginning to realise) the benefits of having our own parliament. An independent one with full responsibility is the best option. No one can represent our country better than ourselves. No one could do it any worse than Westmister. If it's good enough for Latvia, Denmark, Ireland etc, then it's good enough for Scotland! Lets not loose out any longer on the benefits of independence!
3

Xena - Warrior Princess,

26/03/2008 13:39:57
I just wish if they are going to have a referendum they would get on with it.
4

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 13:48:12
#3. I think that's what most folk want. The three Unionist parties refuse to support a referendum though.
5

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 26/03/2008 14:00:57
The unionist parties don't Matter it's the Scottish people who will make the ultimate decision and I'm confident an Independant Scotland will be a reality soon.
6

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 14:09:30
#5. Medium/long term, you're right. Short term, they will prevent a referendum bill from getting through Parliament. Pressure needs to be put on them to change their mind. Failing that, they will need to pay the price at the next Holyrood election.

I can't see a referendum taking place till after the 2011 election.
7

brettgallacher,

edinburgh 26/03/2008 14:11:32
face facts the only reason the other parties call them scottish is they now realise the people of scotland are now peed off by a foreign government trying to tell us what to do, what to eat who should be allowed into my country ie mass migration by the poles asians chinese etc just take a look around about your streets ,housing schemes, schools etc and dare tell me how great mass migration is for my country
8

brettgallacher,

edinburgh 26/03/2008 14:12:59
tonight the masses will sing flower of acotland at the football then go home like the sheep they are lets just for once not just sing the song lets RISE AND BE A NATION AGAIN
9

Miss Jean Brodie,

26/03/2008 14:32:27
The unionist parties are acting like childish idiots and clearly fueling the need for independence - this is a new world where people should not be dictated to by some auld stuffed shirts and blue rinse twinset brigade - Independence first - then a break down of countries toward one world !
10

Allan(handofgod137),

26/03/2008 14:32:57
Why not a 4th choice, scrap follyrood altogether?
11

MrMusic,

26/03/2008 14:37:03
My only concern is that Labour London will make any separation ugly.. and extremely costly for Scotland. Money is how they got the Union in the first place; don't put it past them to use it again.
12

Allan(handofgod137),

26/03/2008 14:37:07
Why not a 4th choice, scrap follyrood altogether?
13

Allan(handofgod137),

26/03/2008 14:37:08
Why not a 4th choice, scrap follyrood altogether?
14

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 14:40:03
#11, #13, #14. Because that position is in such a minority that no one is seriously suggesting it.
15

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 14:43:18
#15. Lol... try posting on the reality rather than what you wish was the case. As many others have commented, if a Unionist party had won the last election, there would be no commission. This is purely an exercise in distracting the public from the goals of the government. Of course the commission was going to get this far. Will it achieve anything useful that the three parties can agree on? I doubt it. But that's not really it's purpose.
16

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 14:49:05
#15. As for support for independence... It's very easy to twist the polls to your liking. I can do the same. The polls suggest that a majority would favour more powers over outright independence at the moment. However, if you take it up a level, it's easy to find a majority that favour independence over the status quo. So basically it will come down to whether the Unionist parties can come up with a 'more powers' solution that will satisfy the people. I really can't see that happening, because as I said above, most Tories and most Labour members don't want to see a significantly strengthened Parliament. So unless the Lib Dems suddenly start to take control of this commission, we will essentially be left with a choice between the status quo, insignificant extra powers, or independence. In that scenario, the polls suggest that there may well be a majority for independence.

At the end of the day the only way to find out is through a referendum. Would you support that?
17

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 14:56:06
#19. What triumphalism? I was criticising what I see as the underhanded goal of the commission (certainly on the part of the Tories and Labour). I may be proven wrong, but given the language used by members of the UK Labour government, I don't see how they could square that with a commission that truly wants to explore significant new powers for the Parliament (e.g. fiscal autonomy).

As far as I understand it, Salmond is calling for a referendum in 2010. That should be plenty time for the commission to report back. Should the commission agree on and significant changes to the devolved settlement, should that not be put to the people via referendum? That is what Salmond is asking them to do. And in that scenario, why should there not be a question on independence also?
18

Eskbank Jambo,

26/03/2008 14:56:56

I am concerned that this will turn out to be a battle of spin.

I would like to know where i can get untainted figures relating to our country's wealth and standing should we decide to separate.

What i have found though is that the same set of figures tell two different scenarios depending on who is commenting, edinburgh or westminster.

Can anyone tell me where i could do some research into national finances to allow me to make an infored decision as to whether we could do it or not.

My greatest fear is that many scots will vote (either way) depending on the TV / press campaigns and the slurs / oneupmanship that will undoubtedly be a part of any campaign.

AS is a great politician, and makes a convincing argument, but i want to make up my own mind.


19

Eskbank Jambo,

Dalkeith 26/03/2008 14:57:42
*informed
20

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 15:02:52
#20. Great. So the commission has till 2010 to come up with concrete suggestions and they can be put to the people in a referendum along with a question on independence.

"Exactly, and that's before the specifics of that option have even been tied down!"

Why do you assume that there would be more support after the specifics have been tied down? Surely everything depends on the specifics. I could certainly support the 'more powers' option if it is strong enough. I very much doubt (due to the people involved) whether it will end up that way.
21

Allan(handofgod137),

26/03/2008 15:03:30
#16 So if you truely believe this you'd have no objection to it being included then.
22

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 15:05:28
#24. Yes, I agree with you, that in this Parliament, the Unionists will decide whether there is a referendum or not. That's why I don't think there will be one during this Parliament. But as I said in #6, the Unionist parties may well pay the price for this in 2011 and I would hope to see a referendum take place during the next Parliament.
23

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 15:07:16
#26. No, I wouldn't have any objection to it being included. I'm not deciding on the matter though and there is no one in a position of responsibility who is advocating a return to full London rule, so I think you might just have to accept that.
24

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 15:12:07
#22. Everyone has an agenda, you're absolutely right. I think you can only really try to look as widely as possible and draw your own conclusions. The government figures themselves are as tainted as any.

I would suggest having a look at this article though:

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1804171.0.0.php

The key argument for me is not about the figures as they stand today, it's about what's possible for the future. When other small countries around us are prospering to a greater extent than us, I can't think of any reason why we can't do likewise.
25

Paloma negra,

26/03/2008 15:42:05
Salmond and his silly fantasies ...!!
He is at best an entertaining baloon
... and at worst a complete loony deluding himself and the Scots !!!
26

FedUpTaxPayer,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 15:55:09
I've no problem with a referendum as long as option 4, 'scrap the parliament' is included on it.

If its not included, how can you know that maybe that's peoples preference? If it is included and is unpopular, the question will have been asked and fairly rejected.

Seems only fair it should be included there, though its difficult to see the turkeys in Holyrood voting for Christmas...
27

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 26/03/2008 16:04:21
Nothing to stop Salmond running an indicative referendum tomorrow. Nothing other than the certainty SNP will lose it. Just look at the recent polls, never mind the last election when only 15% of Scots supported SNP.

Reasonable Scots know that Scotland is already a nation and we can get every thing we could reasonably want within present structures, especially if these became federal ones.
28

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 26/03/2008 16:13:54
#22 - Maybe AM2 will be kind enough to point us all to his information mountain. He is able to produce statistics at an unequalled rate.

I too would be interested in some statistical information to browse through as it would be good to draw my own conclusions.

Regarding independence I am all for it and if we cannot afford it right now, then we better learn to pay our own way in the world.

If the English are propping us up let that stop. If we are propping them up let that also stop. Self determination is the natural order for people and countries. It is the responsible way.

29

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 26/03/2008 16:18:58
#32 Please can you clarify the "15% of Scots" as I keep seeing this figure being banded about but I am unsure about its origin.

Are you saying 15% of Scots support the SNP as a proportion of the total population/ voting population/ registered voters / actual voters.

Are you also implying that there are no supporters of either the labour party,lib dems or cons support either a referendum on independence or independence.
30

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 16:19:26
#32. There is clearly a lot of support for independence amongst non-SNP voters and for you to suggest that those who don't vote are against independence is equally underhand.

Yes, of course everyone knows that Scotland is already a nation. For almost everyone, this is not about nationhood, it's about governance. You yourself admit that we could be better governed within a federal structure. So I think you agree that present structures are failing us. So lets change them. Be it federalism or independence.
31

Eskbank Jambo,

Dalkeith 26/03/2008 16:24:02
#29
Fair article, but are the figures being interpreted with a view to favouring separitism? The journalists concerned have reported the figures in our favour, but are there others which are not? This is the difficulty we face if we are to go forward with any confidence.

#33
I too am in favour of self determination, however if i am to be part of a major constitutional change then i want to do my homework and try to remove my personal feelings from my decision.

Maybe it's just me getting older (and wiser??) but i am becoming more and more cynical about many things.
Generally i feel that i cannot trust anything i hear from the government, the media and newspapers.
For example, the EEN and scotsman are starved of decent reporting, many articles are re-hashed from other websites (football in particular).

How is a chap supposed to have an opinion when the information being fed is open to such abuses?

32

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 16:33:33
#36. Regarding the Herald article. The Herald is generally pro-Labour, pro-Union whilst also being pro-devolution. So they are certainly not trying to spin things in favour of independence.

I certainly wouldn't trust anything that comes out of of the UK government at the moment. Here's a criticism of the GERS figures... http://www.alba.org.uk/scotching/greatdeception.html

There are some other interesting articles on that website, albeit from a pro-independence point of view. You might want to search out some of the better political blogs and forums, they are often a much better source than the national papers.
33

Methalions,

26/03/2008 17:54:15
Amparo.
34

Transparent?,

Scotland 26/03/2008 19:03:58
#4. It's all about timing!

The three unionist parties will have a referendum, after they have successfully destroyed Salmond's credibility and with it the SNP.
35

Merouane,

Edinburgh 26/03/2008 20:30:05
#39. I think you're partly right. I think the Unionists are hoping that the SNP will self-destruct.

It doesn't say much about the case for Unionism when it's key proponents have to rely on the failure of others rather than on their own message.

The commission is a spoiler from the Unionists to try and buy time. It may pay off for them. If the SNP hang in there though and the commission doesn't deliver anything positive, it will be the Unionists who will be left without any credibility (that's if you think they have any even now!).

36

Eve,

Scotland 26/03/2008 20:54:38
Roll on referedum!!!

37

walter,

26/03/2008 22:26:01
This multi choice question is not what I would say is the way to go.
There should be two voting slips or one slip split in two.
The main question should ask,
1. Should Scotland become an independent state.
2. Should Scotland remain with in the UK.
People can then tick the box next to whatever their choice is.
Then the secondly question should ask if Scotland is to remain in the UK framework in what form should that take, more power, less power, status quo or hand power back to Westminster.
That way those who wish to remain in the UK will have a say in what form devolution take and those who wish independence (if it goes against them) will still have a say in which form devolution takes.
38

John S,

27/03/2008 08:04:34
Unless it is mandatory the voter could just vote for one option under STV and if one option reaches 50.01% on the first round there will be no need to transfer any votes. It would be upto say the SNP or the Unionists to canvass there supporters to vote for the same option.
39

donald,

glasgow 27/03/2008 08:27:10
It's time the three right wing onionist parties were given a one way ticket to London, to be laughed at.
40

donald,

glasgow 27/03/2008 08:28:25
Three Stooges
41

Rasco,

Inverness 27/03/2008 10:36:35
AM2 Honest answer please.Why is it now that the 3 Parties are calling for this,maybe,just maybe its because we have a SNP Goverment.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.