Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Referendum challenge by SNP to choose independence or Calman

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.

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: 17 June 2009
FIRST Minister Alex Salmond has said that proposals to increase the devolved powers available to the Scottish Parliament should be part of an SNP referendum on independence.
The gauntlet was thrown down following the announcement of the Calman Commission report, which recommended major constitutional change for Scotland.

Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, who have set up a steering group to push thr
ough the Calman proposals all made it clear last night that a referendum was not likely.

The First Minister made his offer to add a "Calman question" during a symbolic visit to West Lothian – the constituency where he was born and gave its name to the constitutional question framed by its former MP Tam Dalyell.

Mr Salmond welcomed new powers on controlling airguns, speed limits and drink driving, but was dismissive of proposals to give Holyrood direct control of £9 billion of Scotland's finances.

He said that proposals that Holyrood should get control of almost half of the income tax raised north of the Border were meaningless.

He said the current power of varying the rate by 3p has never been used and asked: "Why would the Scottish Parliament then use a variable rate of 10p?"

He described the proposals as fundamentally weak and flawed in a number of areas and said the proposal of just giving Holyrood the same borrowing powers as a council was derisory.

He continued: "I don't think these changes amount to much, but if the unionist parties believed that the changes were as significant as they claim then they should put it to the people alongside ours on independence."

Yesterday Labour dismissed Mr Salmond's suggestion that a question on the Commission to be included in an SNP referendum as another "red herring".

Privately they and the other unionist parties, who last year voted against an independence referendum, made it clear that by having a referendum on Calman they would open the door the SNP's demands again.

A Labour spokesman added: "Whenever the SNP are in trouble they suggest a referendum. They have been running around like headless chickens in their response to Calman."

Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie accused Mr Salmond of "cynical opportunism" over his latest referendum proposals.

"This is a cynical attempt by the SNP to play politics with the serious recommendations from the Calman Commission," she said. "Alex Salmond is clearly worried by the proposals outlined in the report. He knows that independence would not get majority support and he is trying to muddy the waters."

The row was set against a background of announcements on taking the Commission proposals forward and the next stage of the Scottish Government's rival National Conversation.

Labour Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy blogged the terms of reference for the steering group: "A Steering Group to help the UK government and the Scottish Parliament plan how to take forward the Calman recommendations and deliver stronger devolution within a stronger United Kingdom."

He added: "My main aim is to make sure we keep the considerable consensus and develop the momentum behind the plans."

Meanwhile Mr Salmond and SNP Minister for the Constitution Mike Russell tried to claim back some of the lost ground for their National Conversation.

The two addressed an audience of around 170 people in Livingston, West Lothian in a meeting to hear the views of people on independence.

They announced that a new white paper on a referendum will be published on St Andrew's day – 30 November – after publication of policy details. Mr Salmond told the audience that Scotland is now "moving to a decision".

The announcement followed criticism of the National Conversation's lack of research and use of evidence in comparison to the Calman Commission's inquiry.

Mr Russell said: "People will find that the papers we produce in the run-up to the white paper are far more substantial and detailed than anything produced for Calman.

"There will be also a much greater opportunity for people to study and debate them."

He pointed out that the last expert group papers published for Calman appeared just a week before the final report was published and after the crucial decisions had been made. "Hardly time for debate there," he said.

Salmond wants voice of people to be heard

ALEX Salmond's symbolic visit to West Lothian yesterday was a bold move to try to wrest back the initiative on Scotland's constitutional debate.

In recent months, the National Conversation has quietened to something less than a murmur while attention has focused on the Calman Commission.

And to make matters worse, the unionist parties have made it clear – with one significant vote in Holyrood last year – that the SNP's referendum bill will barely see the light of day before it is thrown out.

When Calman published on Monday, the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems made it clear that they intend to act swiftly to kill off the constitutional debate.

Mr Salmond needed to get the National Conversation heard again. And he needed to counteract the criticisms that it has no real evidence or weighty papers to back up its findings, unlike Calman. So it made sense to announce that documents will be produced later this year.

Some had also believed he may, in the gradualist tradition, warmly welcome any changes which add powers to Holyrood. But instead he was quite sniffy about them. Mr Salmond now clearly believes that a little is not nearly enough and that by gratefully receiving a derisory offer he will lose the momentum for a larger prize.

And where better to take back control of the debate than West Lothian? Thanks to the anti-devolution former MP for the area, Tam Dalyell, it has given its name to the most famous constitutional question.

The centrepiece of the new Howden Park Centre, where he met the 170-strong audience, is a modern piece of art called Gravity.

Buoyed by a record poll lead for the SNP in the last few days, Mr Salmond will hope that he can overcome political forces in the Scottish Parliament and ensure that the public have their say in a referendum.





The full article contains 1022 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Nevsky;,

Moscow 16/06/2009 23:04:23
Salmond outwits the Labour Party again. Why not let the Scottish people choose what they want? Or are the unionists afraid of the verdict of the people?

Hard pressed to back any proposal that is not sanctioned by the Scottish people...this is far too big an issue to be decided by a unionist quango.
2

Nevsky;,

Moscow 16/06/2009 23:15:46
Hagbard (Rufus)*

You clearly support more powers for the parliament (you do support ALL of the unionist parties line on this right?) which is very odd as you consistently argue against any more powers.

Confused wee puppy that you are, you just don't know where to turn!
3

Nevsky;,

Moscow 16/06/2009 23:52:55
Quite clearly now the question in a referendum should be:

1. That the Scottish people should take control of their own country.

OR

2. That i want unionist parties to impose on Scotland higher taxes with any benefite being returned to the Westminster treasury and Scotlands block grant cut.

That should do it!
4

Soloman,

Stirling 17/06/2009 00:14:18
Cut the strings from Mandelson,Brown,Cameron and Westminster.

Break Free

X VOTE SNP X

Independence from our Masters
5

Vivas,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 00:14:20
'Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie accused Mr Salmond of "cynical opportunism" over his latest referendum proposals'

Eh ... and the Calman response was what exactly ? The cynical last-ditch twitch of 3 unionist party corpses getting into bed together, after they were skelped by the SNP. Bottom line is this: if Calman has any marginal benefits then the SNP reap them. If it effects no change - or screws things up - then the SNP can say it was nothing to do with them and point the finger at the 3 amigos.

The unionist parties are queuing up to kick the ball into their own net... Happy days :-)))


6

Mercian,

UK 17/06/2009 00:30:26
From the SNP point of view holding a referendum now is probably as good as (or better than)if the Conservatives were in, considering Westminster is in such a huge mess at the moment.
7

innesm,

Austin 17/06/2009 00:32:13
The proposed Referendum will be all about North Sea Oil & Gas revenue. Great Britain cannot afford an Independent Scotland without some guarantee they'll still have access to North Sea tax revenues.
8

Vivas,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 00:33:59
The SNP have long since moved the centre ground of devolution onto their own turf. And its still moving further in their direction with every day that passes.

Even the tories are snared...and most of us know that deep down they're hating it.

9

Canada,

Canada 17/06/2009 00:38:40
GET UP YOUR KNEES SCOTLAND. STOP BEING PUSHED AROUND BY YOUR LONDON MASTERS. GROW UP. STAND UP OR FOR EVER BE SUBSERVIANT UNDERLINGS.
10

Castaway™ ,

17/06/2009 00:41:02
Mis (Annabel Goldie) quote - He (Alex Salmond) knows that independence would not get majority support.
11

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 00:55:27
1
Hagbard Celine

"...so no need for a referendum then."

You are the idiot. The independence referendum is happening anyway. Salmond is merely suggesting that the Calman proposals be included as an option.

12

Iainbroch,

17/06/2009 00:56:07
The Unionists hate democracy. Even the Hag admits that Calman does not ammount to much. I doubt they will agree to a referendum as I said they hate democracy and they would be left defending something that they could not get a consensus on! Also trying to defend the indefensible.

I would prefer an additional option in the referendum - that of Scotland out of the EU. Now that would be a truly democratic choice. That would also confuse and split the Tories and some elements of the Labour Party.
13

frank mcbride,

lusitania 17/06/2009 00:56:43
#15, Castaway.

And we all know that Auntie Annabel and her Party are in touch with the people of Scotland.
14

Barney Thomson,

Reading 17/06/2009 00:56:44
Alex - Brilliant!

You've blown the imperial gunboats out of the water again.

Unionist parties and thier supporters - Can we have a reasoned objection as to why the Scottish people should not decide how they should be governed, please?
15

Jimmy Fae the West,

Hull 17/06/2009 00:59:10
So, Labour do not want to ask the Scots if they want a tax system manipulated by cutting the block grant to an SNP government who will have to raise taxes and a Block grant increased to sleazy back stabbing self interested Londonphiles who hope to force Scotland to vote for them by increasing the block grant and cutting taxes? Genius if any Scots ever fell for such a Mugabe style gerrymandering!
Democracy? Hardly.
16

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 01:03:28
the union?? day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute, we are watching it dismantle it's self. it is only held together now by a few self serving politicans. and when the political wind changes direction, and it will!. then labour, lib dems or even the tories will break their pact of convience and independence will be the only clear option to the floating voters!
17

,

17/06/2009 01:11:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

Iainbroch,

17/06/2009 01:11:36
Broonie has to offer Banks special under the counter deals now to sell his latest Broonie gilts. The solvent of the world dont want to touch them with a barge pole! Only a monkey would now pretend to say there is anything such as a Union Dividend.
19

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 01:13:34
The Calman proposals represent a complete win/win for the SNP. Shoild there be any benefit for Scotland, everybody knows the concessions were only made because the people elected an SNP government.

Meanwhile, the unionist cabal will take the blame for those aspects of the proposals which are clearly inadequate and everybody will realise that these inadequacies will only be addressed if they continue to vote SNP.

And contradictions implicit in the Calman proposals will not be lost on anyone either. They will well remember how the unionists railed against tax-raising powers for the Scottish government. And they will note the blatant hypocrisy in the cabal's new-found enthusiasm for such powers.

Altogether, it is quite astounding how the unionists have managed to score an own goal while simultaneously shooting themselves in the foot.

20

Edward,

17/06/2009 01:14:38
The choice is simple for Scots
In a referendum to choose between remaining in the Union with England and the Calman recomendations of Scotland keeping HALF of its Income Tax and levying a tax on plastic bags and NOT keeping the other taxes as well as Oile and Gas Revenues
OR
Full Independence and keeping ALL the txes raised in Scotland as well as the Oil and Gas revenues

I would be inclined to go for full independence!
Why on earth should we be subserviant to Westminster?
21

Ronald Penman,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 01:15:50
Its clear that Calman has all the credibility of Mystic Meg !

Once again Sir Eck and his merry band are running rings around the opposition - what opposition ? lol

All the scandal -like that of Jim The Red "Socialist",Devine - have sailed past the great man, much to the charin of those NEW LABOUR scumbags
and their simpering, slavering sycophants in the press.

Don't they ever get even a touch embarrased at having to support such a filthy rable of nonentitys like THE NEW LABOUR PARTY I wonder ?
22

Ronald Penman,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 01:22:42
And isn't it bloody hilareous that not one NEW LABOUR flunky and halfwit has had the courage to appear on Jim Devines thread and defend the "great man". After all,Rufus and Grahamski, he's a "firey socialist" y'know ! A defender of the poor. And a "bonny fechter"!

hahhahahhahahahhahhahahahaha

Only those with a heart of stone could not fail to laugh like a drain at the mess NEW LABOUR finds itself.
The most corrupt Party ever, ed" by the most inept,useless "Leader" in recent history.
23

Fletty73,

Stirling 17/06/2009 01:32:23
Less to pay in lodgings, but the equivalent less in pocket money? Of course this daft fudge should not be presented in any referendum. It should be mocked then binned.
24

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 17/06/2009 01:40:58
INDEPENDENCE or calman. Wow a no brainer there. Roll on the Referendum on INDEPENDENCE and be FINALLY RID OF THIS PATHETIC SHOWER OF LIEING STEALING DISHONEST DISGUSTING CREATURES from westminster
25

Brianwci,

17/06/2009 01:47:22
Two good posts Ronald, shame you had to spoil it with your OTT s...b..s expression.

"There will be no referendum" the unionist mantra goes.

Let's see those shell shocked faces get into mantra mode the day the general election results are declared.

Their parties, having been slaughtered and about to face the Holyrood election in early 2011, will be in no mood to antagonise the electorate any more than they obviously have done already.

Especially as the SNP voting record is even BETTER for Holyrood than Westminster.

No siree bobtail. There will be a Referendum in 2010 and Independence will be the main talking point, even if it's shared with Calman and or the status quo.

Roll on 2010.
26

Edward,

17/06/2009 01:53:15
Its funny that the Unionists dont want a referendum now to choose between the Calman Kak and full Independence
Obviously no confidence in aksing the Scots to choose
between talking only HALF of Income Tax and little else against Full Indepedence and Scots getting ALL taxes and Revenues
It really is a no brainer!, even the Unionists have realised the Calman Kak giving Scotand HALF of just the Income tax isnt really a winner!
27

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 01:56:46
31
Edward

"Its funny that the Unionists dont want a referendum now to choose between the Calman Kak and full Independence"

Not so amusing that they intend to impose the "Calman Kak" regardless of the wishes of the Scottish electorate.

28

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 02:06:55
now would somebody bring me up to speed? the unionist parties are now telling the scottish people they are not getting a fair deal from london? am i right?
29

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 02:08:23
in other words, all the political parties in scotland, are saying scotland does not get a fair deal?
30

Castaway™ ,

17/06/2009 02:29:32
In recent months, the National Conversation has quietened......

The National Conversation::http://tinyurl.com/48aee7
6 January, 2009.The number of unique visitors to the National Conversation website was 72,706.
12 March 2009.There have been over 474,000 hits on the National Conversation website themed pages; 36,500 people have read the white paper on-line; 10,800 downloads of the white paper; and 4,300 comments have been posted on the blog.
20 May 2009 Over 483,000 hits on the National Conversation website, 37,000 people accessing Choosing Scotland's Future online,

Calman Commission::http://tinyurl.com/4n9j7e
This website has been a vital communication resource and means of engagement throughout our work. By the end of May, it had been used by over 13,000 different people (a total of over 130,000 page-views). I hope you will now find it useful as a comprehensive archive of our work – thank you for your interest.Sir Kenneth Calman 15 June 2009
31

George Coutts,

Far Enough Away From The Nuke Missiles And Holly L 17/06/2009 02:31:45
The Calman Commission is yet another way to quell the flames of freedom for scotlend.
Never mind increased powers of the less than half baked DEVOLUTION or DILUTION SCOILAND!!!!!!!!!
2 simople questions with no added poop.
QUESTION!! DO YOU WANT A FREE AND DEMOCRATIC SCOTLAND.
YES or NO.......AND MAY GOD AND SAINT ANDREW BE WITH US ON THAT DAY, Oh yes England WE DO HAVE WERAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, You should Know you put them there> BUT THE STING IS IN THE DETAIL BECAUSE YOUR GETTING THEM RIGHT BACK .BOMM BOOM??????????????????
32

George Coutts,

17/06/2009 02:34:35
I made a couple of miss spellings,
I jist dinna bileeve at min, oh mi heed!!!!!!!!!!!
33

Anonym,

17/06/2009 02:58:11
Castaway. I do believe your post exposes a wee fib in the article!

(Great post, thanks.)
34

somerferg,

perth 17/06/2009 03:28:30

# 38 - HAVEN'T EVEN TAKEN THE TROUBLE TO LEARN TO SPEAK ENGLISH YET!!! -as opposed to the English I suppose who of course speak the language so well??

As for your other comments regarding state handouts - if that WERE true would you know think the Engerlish in their wisdom would have given Scotland the boot long ago?? No - wonder why?? Could it have anything to do with the FACT that Scotland has been bankrolling Engerland for long and weary?? Yes I think someone once said they (the Engerlish) will wait until there is nothing left then let Scotland go. Hope you can understand my English language skills - maybe I need a phD rather than a Master's degree to meet the high linguistic skills of the English or you?
35

somerferg,

perth 17/06/2009 03:29:43

p.s. INDEPENDENCE :)
36

Castaway™ ,

17/06/2009 03:38:41
#39 Anonym
More detailed information can be found at these urls:-
Scottish Parliament Written answers.
http://tinyurl.com/mnq6ys ::7 Jan 2009
http://tinyurl.com/mgut36 :: 9 Apr 2009
http://tinyurl.com/moprlj :: 20 May 2009

Scottish Parliament written answers ref national conversation, to tabled written questions submitted by George Foulkes MSP
http://tinyurl.com/mzqc9j
37

Anonym,

17/06/2009 04:15:00
Hmm. Another red herring, the article says. I'm wondering what the other red herring is.

Perhaps Foulkes knows. He's certainly been busy looking for one, what with freedom of information requests and questions... mostly relating to costs and web hits and, er, spending commitments... and this little nugget:

"George Foulkes: To ask the Scottish Executive how many comments have been removed from the National Conversation website after initially being published and what the reasons were for their removal."

Ha!
38

Anonym,

THE LAND OF MILK AND HONEY 17/06/2009 04:19:57
:)

George Foulkes: To ask the Scottish Executive why non-geographical terms such as "The Land of Milk and Honey" have been accepted as a location for responses on the National Conversation website.

Quite right George, such informality should never be tolerated on the interwebs. :)
39

Am Fògarrach,

17/06/2009 04:28:11
#40 somerferg - I think #38 Vista already has a PhD. He puts out keech which is Piled Higher & Deeper.
40

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 17/06/2009 04:37:12
As I said yesterday:

CALMAN HAS HAD IT'S SAY. NOW LET THE PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND HAVE THEIR SAY.

Or are the unionist parties too scared to find out whether they represent ANYBODY in Scotland any more
41

Am Fògarrach,

17/06/2009 04:43:00
#43 Vista -

Your impeccable command of English doesn't mean you have any grasp of the economic reality, pointed out by somerferg, that Scotland has been bankrolling the United Kingdom's financial profligacy at least since the 1970s when oil was discovered in Scottish waters.

Whether you are Scots or English, you are still a unionist troll.


42

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 17/06/2009 04:59:47
Once again the people of Scotland being told what they can have, and once again being told that they cannot have an opinion on the matter.
43

Am Fògarrach,

17/06/2009 05:21:34
#43 Vista -

If you still don't believe somerferg's contention that Scotland has been bankrolling the United Kingdom's financial profligacy at least since the 1970s when oil was discovered in Scottish waters, see the documents referenced below which were analysed by Niall Aslen, a respected forensic accountant, using the UK government's own figures:
1. THE GREAT DECEPTION - GERS- 2004 / 2005
2. THE GREAT OBFUSCATION - GERS- 2006 / 2007
Both are available at http://www.realmofscotland.com/financial/. The first document will come up automatically. Click on "2" at the bottom right corner at the end of the first document and the second document will come up. Ans surprise! They are both written in English.


44

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 17/06/2009 05:23:02
Great move by Sir Ek.

Let the unholy alliance of the unionists try and press ahead with the implementation of this in the face of them refusing to allow the people of Scotland, who rejected them on June 4th, have an opinion on the matter.

Also lets see what the Scottish Press are really made off.

Lets see the Scotsman and the Herald call for a referendum.

Don't hold your breath folks.

CALMAN HAS HAD IT'S SAY, NOW LET THE PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND HAVE THEIR SAY.
45

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 17/06/2009 05:30:51
#10 Cygnus In Exile

"And will he add a 'Tam Dalyell' question - a referendum option to abolish Holyrood and restore the status quo ante?"

Sure, but I don't see why you would want to divide the Unionist vote even further.

Usually not the most intelligent of journalistic says but on this particular occasion I think the Scottish Sun seems to have gotten it right.

"ALEX Salmond yesterday challenged his rivals to a referendum fight between new tax powers for Holyrood or full independence — and they all BOTTLED it."
46

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 17/06/2009 05:49:06
The unionist parties had better watch out. If they don't hold a referendum, the Scottish Government will. And if that is the case, the unionist parties won't be able to bend the rules to their own ends.

Question: Do you want Scotland to remain in the Union with the rest of the UK?

Unless 66% or more of the total electoral role vote "YES', then it is taken as a "NO" vote, and Scotland moves forward to become an independent nation. NO POSTAL VOTES ALLOWED!!

That seems fair, doesn't it??
47

Earman,

Paphos 17/06/2009 06:07:50
Masterful, simply masterful. Small wonder that Mr Salmond's stock remains so high amongst the Scottish electorate. The remaining Unionists must be "confounded"!
48

donald,

glasgow 17/06/2009 06:16:43
Listen to Labour riggers talk of a "rigged referendum" and apolitical Tores complain of bringing politics into politics. Roll on the referendum and Independence!
49

Media at One,

17/06/2009 07:03:47
Independence is something the Scottish people have always had. Freedom has been a right of the Scottish people for many hundreds of years. Freedom of movement, freedom of speech and freedom of expression are civil liberties that all Scots are entitled to. Only recently have the people of the free world been obligated to keep their views to themselves. Freedom of speech is slowly being replaced with "mind your words" on the basis that PC is the new world mantra.
But for a long time Scotland has enjoyed independence and freedom and as a result the country is now far wealthier than ever in her history.
Being part of the union has earned Scotland world wide exposure, it helps when the equal parts operate responsibly to increase the wealth of the whole. Remove one quarter from the whole and the quarter stands alone, weaker and without the support it once enjoyed. Not only that, but when the stand alone quarter is already internally breaking up due to the high levels of animosity that the East has for the West the problems are compounded.
50

brianmca3,

auld reekie 17/06/2009 07:21:05
i said this yesterday so will say again
this is a catch 22 situation,by rejecting this report,the snp would then be seen as only wanting to fight with westminster
yet if snp took all this on board,the other 3 come election time would bleat "The SNP will raise your taxes,people in england are paying less",thus killing off votes as even turkeys dont vote for an early christmas,so voters wont vote to pay more taxes than down south
damned if you damned if you dont
evil brown strikes again,and whilst scots fight over calman,the iraq war report will quietly dissapear in favour of herr brown and co
51

The Busman,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 07:24:12
Two questions:

* Why did Scotland join the Union in the first place?

* If independence did come about, could there be a way of leaving Edinburgh and at least East Lothian out of it?

I have the distinct feeling that SNP's strength in the polls is more a function of their time in government, rather than representing significant grass-roots support for independence. And independence would *not* solve the dependency culture which is at the root of many of Scotland's problems.
52

spiderman,

argyll 17/06/2009 07:25:36
Calman is a cancer expert. What on earth is he doing making recommendations about Scotland's political future? On what basis does he think we should give his opinion any special weight? Especially as his commission was set up by the minority parties in Scotland. What right do they have to try to impose their views on us. The whole point is that Scotland's future should be decided by only one body - the people of Scotland.
53

eric,

lothian 17/06/2009 07:26:50
Why is london hell bent on holding onto Scotland if its such a drain on english tax payers!
54

gus1940,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 07:28:52
Re Annabel - And I don't suppose The Calman Report has anything whatsoever to do with 'playing politics' - other than 100% of it.
55

Media at One,

17/06/2009 07:29:41
eric - London isnt holding onto Scotland - The Scottish people have pledged their allegiance to queen and country. Only now in the last decade or so are we beginning to hear rumblings that queen and country may no longer be necessary. But until that happens, the Scots cling to London, not the other way around.
56

mr broon,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 07:30:07
It is doubtful if any of the Calman recommendations will ever be implemented?

However, if any of the report's findings are accepted it only confirms that, to stop the Nationalists in their tracks, the Unionist parties will have to keep moving Scotland more and more towards becoming an autonomous, self-governing, quasi-federal country within this unitary state.



57

Earman,

Paphos 17/06/2009 07:33:08
#56

"Being part of the union has earned Scotland world wide exposure, it helps when the equal parts operate responsibly to increase the wealth of the whole."

If I may so, I think that your belief that the "quarters of the Union" have ever been - or, indeed, were ever supposed to be - "equal" somewhat scuppers your post.

Had the Union ever been truly "equal", I doubt very much whether the Scottish electorate would now be moving towards Independence. There would simply be no need.
58

Phil C,

17/06/2009 07:35:52
The huge problem with Calman is that it is not a consensus document. It comes solely from a range of unionists with their own agenda and leaves out the wishes of the largest party. This is what unionists call democracy!

Calman's proposals appear to give a bit more power to the Scottish Parliament, but in truth they merely tinker round the edges of the devolution settlement. They are of no real benefit to anybody- just more window dressing and playing for time.

Scottish unionists will blindly back these proposals of course, but it's time they stopped to think what they were actually backing. It's time they made that brave switch to fully support the birth right of Scots and their children to live in their own country. It's clear we have the people and the resources to succeed.

While the unionist parties have their ganged-up, bully-boy majority, no real progress can be made towards the rebirth of our nation and all the benefits it could bring to everyone living here.

59

Earman,

Paphos 17/06/2009 07:42:13
#63

"The Scottish people have pledged their allegiance to queen and country."

When did they do that? Not, surely, at the signing of the Treaty of Union in 1707, given that said treaty had to be signed in secret due to mass riots on the streets of many Scottish towns and cities AGAINST the idea of Scotland being "sold" by corrupt Scottish "noblemen".

Hardly "clinging to London", is it ?
60

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 07:49:15
62 Rulesbutnotrulers

51% of those who vote.

Dead people don’t count.
61

Phil C,

17/06/2009 07:52:26
#62 Rules "What percentage of the electorate is required for a successful independence plebiscite?"

50.1% of those who vote? (2 option referendum)
Largest vote (3 or more option referendum)

Your 8% is a nonsense and you know it!

REAL results of (irrelevant) Euro 2009 election: The SNP took 29.1% of the vote ahead of Labour's 20.8%. The Tories took 16.8% and the Lib Dems 11.5%.

THE SNP WIN BY A LANDSLIDE!! WE'RE FREE!!!....if only!
62

TWC,

exLabour 17/06/2009 08:02:18
62 Rulesbutnotrulers

Rules, I don't se the problem with this referendum proposal.
I is really only puting to the test the claims of all the Parties at Holyrood.
The unionists claim that what Calman offers is what the people want; the Nats want Independence.
What could be wrong with this??Unless there is a feeling that the people will not be satisfied with the offer.

We need a Referendum anyway to change the agreement.
63

BIG EYE,

Paisley 17/06/2009 08:05:47
Calman has achieved a lot for the SNP already. All the unionist parties are firmly hooked together defending an incredibly poor proposal for Scotland.

We now know what Devolution MAX is as far as all three Unionist parties are concerned.

No more mystery just a clear choice.

It's outcome will be decided by a referendum in 2010 or a massacre in 2011.
64

tog,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 08:12:40
Proposals for change that would move move the UK closer to a federal system, would perhaps make tax significantly more expensive and more complex to collect and would give the Scottish parliament new powers seemingly decided by what is making headlines in the Scottlsh tabloid press and these proposals are being put forward by the parties not in power in Scotland and are going to be put in place in the next year or so with no public consultation. Something here does not add up.
65

John S,

17/06/2009 08:14:07
The plus side of the Calman Commission report is that it gives the SNP a continuing focus going into the next GE, to a possible referendum and SP elections in 2011.
Which brings together Annabel Goldie, Iain Gray and Tavish Scott on the same platform having to jointly defend their support of the report before the electorate saying, I agree with my friend Annabel, I agree with my friend Tavish,
I agree with my new friend Iain when he says no referendum, I agree with my new friend Annabel when she says no referendum, I agree with my new friend Tavish when he says no referendum.
Voters now you can vote for the "Scottish Friendly Party"
66

TWC,

exLabour 17/06/2009 08:14:29
71 BIG EYE

I agree, the unionist Parties must have their collective heads up their fundamentals.
Nobody will accept this fudge.
67

Grahamski,

Falkirk 17/06/2009 08:17:06
66
Phil,
"It comes solely from a range of unionists with their own agenda and leaves out the wishes of the largest party. This is what unionists call democracy!"

It comes from the representatives of the majority of the Scottish people. The SNP, who managed to attract 17% of the electorate, refused to take part.
68

Stan Butler,

17/06/2009 08:22:52

I think we should have a referendum every week to decide what subjects we should be holding referenda on.

69

Phil C,

17/06/2009 08:26:29
#75 Grahamskijump

The SNP are clear in their policies and objectives- no fudge. They didn't want to lend Calman any credence. Any perceived alliance of LibLab and Tories has to be viewed as totally untrustworthy and unnatural!

I'm sure that you and your Labour chums are delighted with your wee bedfellow, Annabel!!
70

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 08:26:32
75 Grahamski

Keep your head buried in the sand if you wish and it allows you to keep your morale up.

A blind man can see the way the wind is blowing, and that Saltire up there is flying ever higher and proudly waving in that wind.

71

john z,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 08:27:21
What is wrong, is simply this;

The future of the Scottish Parliament is being determined by english MP's. Forget West Lothian... this is the Holyrood question.

Why should decisions on the Scottish Parliament not be made IN THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT??????

Why is Westminster in London even getting involved?? If the people of Scotland choose a particular set of powers for OUR parliament in Scotland, why do english MP's get to decide if it's ok??

We either believe in democracy or we don't.

The way these new 'powers' is being decided by Gordon Brown, is EXACTLY the kind of approach that was previously used in the english colonies, around the world - telling the 'natives' what they could and couldn't decide. No wonder the colonies told London to 'F' off.

Isn't it time for Scotland to do the same.
72

Phil C,

17/06/2009 08:28:15
#78 Stan

That's the smartest thing you've said in a while! I'm sure that you're another one who's delighted with your wee bedfellow, Annabel!!
73

Phil C,

17/06/2009 08:38:09
Don't we just love the way LabTories count election results and change them to suit their own ends. Remember the '79 Devolution Referendum Fudge (40% of the electorate!!!). We should never let such undemocratic travesties happen again, though it did have a silver lining for me. Though I voted 'no' at the time, this Labour trickery made me switch to a deeply held passion for independence.

Folk like Graham and Rules want to bend the figures again!
74

john z,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 08:40:29
When will we Scots get off our subservient colonial knees, and tell London NO, you cannot tell Scotland what to do.

We Scots and our own Scottish parliament need to tell Westminster that WE the Scotish people will decided the powers of our parliament.

London can control its own affairs, but new powers for the Scottish government should be decided by the Scottish parliament.

Does the French parliament tell the German parliament what powers it can have??

Does the Italian Parliament tell the Danish Parliament what powers it can have.


So, please, please tell me, why, why, why, the London Parliament is dictating to the Scottish Parliament what powers it can have.

Could you imagine the scenes if the Scottish Parliament started dictating to the London Parliament on what powers it could have.

The details of Calman are irrelevant and a smokescreen, London should have NO SAY on what the Scottish Parliament decided. Period.


Oh, and a message for the moronic political leaders who are behind this garbage, do you seriously think this will end here??? Every new government in London, will have its own 'calman' to adjust the decisions of the Scottiah Parliament to meet its own London based desires.

Calman is not the end, it is just the beginning. Expect a London based 'review' of Scottish parliament powers, at least every four years.

Iain Gray, Goldie, Tavish.... you fools, you are the ones who have opened up this process, and it WILL NEVER,EVER stop.
75

,

17/06/2009 08:40:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
76

,

17/06/2009 08:56:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

noswod,

Honestas 17/06/2009 09:06:06
Aye wit ever happens is going tae be a lot less cash doon frae £33bn tae nearer £20bn. if we need mair then its tax up tae 60% plus. Ya canny hae aw this free stuff withoot haeing tae pay for it. The reason that the rest O the Britains want Scotland tae stay in the Union is that they dinny want to have another bail oot 5 years doon the line that will mak the cost O the twa banks look like sweeties. I would recommend that everyone spends as much as they can can out of the Public service pot in the next two budget years as you are going tae be paying a lot mair tax by a reduction of 20% in your living standards tae keep an independent Scotland afloat. I can remember "Ally's army" if only we could get tae the world cup finals we wid win it. Exactly the same mob are saying that if only we could get independence we wid be rich, the reality is that we are going to be much, much poorer.
78

Linda,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 09:07:32
More bias from Maddox a reporters job is to report not comment.
"Meanwhile Mr Salmond and SNP Minister for the Constitution Mike Russell tried to claim back some of the lost ground for their National Conversation"

Many more punters have viewed online and commented on the National Conversation than on Calman

Apart from fact that Calman Commission never held a public meeting of (non hand picked) 170 people the National Conversation and Referendum planned for 2010 is on track.
79

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 17/06/2009 09:15:32
Calman?

BRING IT ON!
80

john z,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 09:24:49
Number 63

You are sadly mistaken There are few Scots who pledge 'allegiance to queen and country'..and which country does that phrase mean.

The queen is aa nice lady, and extremely knowledgable in world affairs and history, but I like many Scots owe her no allegiance.

It is a fact, that in Scotland the Monarch was always treated differently, and was a 'servant' of the people. There was no such concept in Scotland as 'loyal subjects'. In England however, it always has been different, with people being 'subjects' of the crown.

So, queen Elizabeth I in Scotland to me, is a nice old lady, but I am not nor will ever be the 'subject' of her or ANY Monarch (even a Stuart one).

I'm sure she would actually tell you this herself, as she has a very full knowledge of the original Scottish Monarchy.

Just a note, this has little to do with the act of union of 1707, as the union of the crowns was some hundred years earlier.
81

john z,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 09:26:58
Back to the topic in hand.

Why are the unelected Gordon Brown and the unionists feart of a referendum??
82

Phil C,

17/06/2009 09:27:20
#94 Rules "Some say 51% of those who vote. So, if only ten people vote and six say yes then that means Scotland has voted for independence?"

You say no. I say yes, though 50.1% would suffice! If folk can't be bothered voting, that's their lookout.

Anyway what's with all this 'plebiscite' stuff? Can you not call it a vote, election or referendum like everyone else?
83

John S,

17/06/2009 09:30:50
#89 PR1 as an addition to your post. TNS polls Aug 2007 to Feb 2009
Feb 2009 I agree 38% :I do not agree 40%:Don't know 22%
Oct 2008 : 35% : 43% : 22%
Jun 2008 : 39% : 41% : 21%
Mar 2008 : 41% : 40% : 19%
Nov 2007 : 40% : 44% : 16%
Aug 2007 : 35% : 50% : 15%
Average over the 6 polls = 38% : 43% : 19 %
Removing Aug 2007 we get average : 38.5% : 41.5% : 20%
84

john z,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 09:32:45
If tha Calman report is so god, let's put it to the test.

Let's have a referendum, with the chocie of talks to move Scotland towards full independence, or the weasle worded Calman commission where London decides on the powers of the Scottish Parliament.

Why are the unionists afraid to have a referendum?? They keep telling us there is no support for independence.

So, let's have a referendum then. Put it to the test.

The people of Scotland can then decide, do you want your country run by the sleaze ridden english parliament and house of Lords, or do you want your country run by the modern, open and accountable, proportional, democratic Scottish Parliament??
85

Marian,

17/06/2009 09:32:56
What are the unionist parties afraid of - that the people of Scotland will have a say in their future for once?

The unionists haven't woken up to the fact that besides SNP core supporters there are very large numbers of floating voters who would want a referendum on Scotland's future.

These supporters are more than likely to vote at the UK general election for a party that gives them their right to have a referendum.
86

donald,

glasgow 17/06/2009 09:33:15
It wasn't Tam the Bam who invented the West Lothian Question.

It was another Brit Nat, Enoch Powell, when he complained about West Lothian and West Bromwich, etc.

Enoch had the support of London dockers and Birmingham car workers, et, who marched for his "Rivers of blood", speech.
87

Mikey,

17/06/2009 09:37:27
Rules, you've missed the boat. You were quite happy to pander when unionists were in power but now that they ain't, well, you're lack of tolet training is showing.

As I've said before, why not just leave if you hate us so much? I'm sure that a Quisling paradise is there for you... south of the border....
88

qohldr,

17/06/2009 09:42:50
How is Scotland going to get this referendum.
There is only one main Scottish political party offering a referendum, The other main parties in Scotland are not.
Any referendum will have to be voted on by the majority of the representative in the Scottish parliament.
This means that the party that wants to hold a referendum will not be able to hold one until they hold an overall majority of seats in parliament.
They will not hold the majority of seats in parliament until the majority of Scots vote for them as their representatives.
I ask again how is Scotland going to get this referendum if the majority of Scots keep electing a majority of representative into parliament from parties who will vote against holding a referendum knowing that they will vote against holding one.
Democracy is a wonderful thing.
89

aljok.23,

the world 17/06/2009 09:43:29
Independence please. X
90

Mèths,

17/06/2009 09:53:30
Rulersbutnotrubbers

"Fewer than 8% of eligible Scots voted SNP in the recent euros"

You keep posting your nonsense. I'll ask again. Does you 8% include dead people? Idiot.
91

Mèths,

17/06/2009 09:54:51
Medium

"The Scottish people have pledged their allegiance to queen and country."

I can't remember this being part of any manifesto. Begone with your tripe.
92

Alan B,

17/06/2009 09:58:54
The unionist position not to hold a referendum is inconsistent at best and general shows a complete contempt for democracy.

If the unionist thought a referendum was needed to create a scottish parliament then surely you need one to change the powers of that scottish parliament.

Calman really should have outlined a few different alternatives that could have been put to a referendum. It would be much better to have a referendum over fiscal autonomy.

93

Alan B,

17/06/2009 10:07:37
#Rulesbutnotrulers

By having a referendum on independence we can find out what the nation wants. Party politics complicates things and is about many issues.

With a referendum there are 3 views.

1)independence
2)union
3)do not care or have a view on it

As such we need to find out what the majority of people that bother to vote want.

If you do not go with the majority of those that vote then you will be chosing to go with the minority view.

What we have seen from labour is creating a scottish parliament to stop independence. And now when the snp were doing well and support for independence up for grabs the unionist have tried to redefine the union to try to encourage scots to stay.

The real problem is the unionist parties are not interested in the will of the people or democracy but about retaining the union no matter what. It is this attitude that is so reprehensible.
94

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 10:12:33
#53

"The unionist parties had better watch out. If they don't hold a referendum, the Scottish Government will. And if that is the case, the unionist parties won't be able to bend the rules to their own ends."

The Scottish Government is a minority government. They won't be able to put a referendum through parliament without the support of at least one of the unionist parties.
95

Phil C,

17/06/2009 10:12:34
Tedium (credit to Meths 112)

"The Scottish people have pledged their allegiance to queen and country."

I can't remember this being part of any manifesto. Begone with your tripe.
96

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 10:17:03
117 Yeah1

If, as they claim to be the case, the Unionist parties have nothing to fear but all to gain from such a referendum, why should they oppose it?
97

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 10:17:19
#113

"My problem is not so much the turn out but the fact Labour were elected on 35% of the popular vote (22% of the eligible) vote and were able to form a gov."

Er...the SNP were elected on 32.9% of the popular vote for the Scottish parliament.

If it is a 'farce' that labour were able to form a government on a 35% vote then surely it is even more of a farce that the SNP were able to do the same?
98

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 10:18:53
#119

"If, as they claim to be the case, the Unionist parties have nothing to fear but all to gain from such a referendum, why should they oppose it?"

I don't know, why don't you ask them?
99

Edward,

17/06/2009 10:21:24
The establishment of the Union with England and the formation of the United Kingdom in 1707 was wholely based on corrupt terms, the main decisions regarding the Union were made in Westminster. THe old Scottish Parliament were expected to rubber stamp the act of Union, which they did as a result of bribery and corruption, with money and promises of peerages offered to tyhos who voted to accept the Union. This is primarly why it was never a union of equals. The people of Scotland were never consulted and in fact rioted at hearing about the proposed union.
Nothing much has change in those 300 years,apart from perhaps there is no rioting!
100

Teamdroid,

17/06/2009 10:23:10
Of course, if the changes were significant, a referendum is necessary, as it was for the Parliament in the first place.

So either the changes are trivial, or we need a referendum. What's it to be, Gordon?

The logic which the Tories/Labour/LDs don't like to admit is that these modest changes are only coming at all because of the rise of the SNP. Were Labour/LDs in colaition at Holyrood now, does anyone seriously believe devolution would be advanced?
101

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 10:23:11
121 Yeah1

That is exactly what the SNP Government intend to do.

Do keep up to date.

102

John S,

17/06/2009 10:23:12
#107 qohldr - How is Scotland going to get this referendum.
The way I see it during the term of this current Scottish Parliament, the SNP lead SG can threaten the Scottish Parliament either pass the referendum bill or FM and the SG resigns, if the FM resigns then the following comes into play, the referendum bill will be lost.
The FM having resigned would trigger a 28-day period for the nomination of a replacement; should that time period expire without the nomination of a new First Minister, then an extraordinary election would have to be called.
This new FM would continue in office until the next SP GE, then the voters will decide.

103

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 17/06/2009 10:24:52
I see Media one is back again. Don't worry about him, he sang the praised of Teflon Tony and Maggie Brown before May 2007 and their "economic miracle".

Westminster complain about the "West Lothian" question. What about the "SE of England" question:
- English MP's voting as to what kind of Parliament and what powers Scotland can be "garnted"
- English MP's ndeciding the level of pocket money the Scottish Government can have
- English MP's travelling up to Scotland to campaign in the Scottish Holyrood election, and no doubt claiming expenses.
- English MP's deciding on the remuneration that political parties are granted after election results - and then using national party funds to increase this amount.
- Unionist parties in Scotland breaking the limits on election spending by having English "volunteers" travelling north to campaign for their parties.
104

Alan B,

17/06/2009 10:27:10
#Yeah1

Appart from the undemocratic stance of the unionist parties if they do not allow a referendum on independence and want the will of parliament.

Then the snp will have full justification to take scotland out the union if they get a majority of mps at the next general election in scotland.

105

Allan(handofgod137),

17/06/2009 10:28:14
"Why would the Scottish Parliament then use a variable rate of 10p?"

Answer - To cut taxes, and make Scotland a more attractive place for companies to locate to.

The fact that fat n'eck ignores the obvious shows the gnats up for the high taxing control freaks that they are.
106

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 10:28:46
To:

Frank McBride - Lusitania
The Displaced Glaswegian
et al

Thank-you very much for answering my query yesterday over on the 'Calman Confounds Critics' story. They were well-written and informative.

I agree that the Government View of this Land of ours is indeed London-Centric and is not just injurious to Scotland. When you look at some of the extreme edges of England you can see which areas lie furthest from Government Thinking. Especially the Ex-Industrial heartlands, now that they're no longer of benefit to the country . . . .

As for the SNP manifesto, I doubt very much whether our local Library will have a copy. The events of the Scottish Parliament are very rarely reported in this neck of the woods - Kent, possibly 5 - 10 items per year AT MOST and that's being generous.

Do you think then that, Post-Independence (2010/11/12), the SNP having done the Deed the Scottish Electorate will return to their old voting habits i.e Lib Dem & Labour?

Finally, I Apologise Unreservedly for any smear, perceived or actual, that I may have posted in my trying to 'rattle the cage. It was not my intent to cause offence and I am sorry that it took semi-abuse to get information which, as I state, is generally unavailable here - I will check our Library and peruse it if possible.

Thank-you once again,

Neal
107

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 10:28:50
58
The Busman

"* Why did Scotland join the Union in the first place?"

We, the people, were not given a choice. It was yet another case of the economically powerful making decisions for their own benefit with no thought for wider implications or long-term consequences.

If the Treaty of Union was a commercial contract, it would have no standing in law.

"* If independence did come about, could there be a way of leaving Edinburgh and at least East Lothian out of it?"

Don't be ridiculous.

"I have the distinct feeling that SNP's strength in the polls is more a function of their time in government, rather than representing significant grass-roots support for independence."

Is it that you think the SNP has concealed the fact that it is a nationalist party? Or is it that you think the Scottish people are too stupid to know what they are voting for.

"And independence would *not* solve the dependency culture which is at the root of many of Scotland's problems."

Or is it just that you are an irrogant prack?

108

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 17/06/2009 10:30:22
#125
This is very true, and you can imagine, after the unionist parties reaction to Calman, that we would get a coalition of Labour/Tory/LibDems just to prevent an election and stop the SNP getting a full clear mandate.
109

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 10:30:25
#125

"The way I see it during the term of this current Scottish Parliament, the SNP lead SG can threaten the Scottish Parliament either pass the referendum bill or FM and the SG resigns, if the FM resigns then the following comes into play, the referendum bill will be lost."

In those circumstances the three unionist parties would probably nominate a first minister themselves and form a coalition government - so it wouldn't get as far as an election.
110

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 10:34:56
62
Rulesbutnotrulers

"Fewer than 8% of eligible Scots voted SNP in the recent euros."

False comparison. In the EU elections voters were considering a range of issues. In a referendum on independence they will be considering only one.

"What percentage of the electorate is required for a successful independence plebiscite?"

That, like the actual question asked, will be decided by the Scottish Parliament. There being no written constitution, a simple majority of votes cast would normally suffice.

At least the British Labour Party won't be able to rig this referendum.

111

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 10:34:56
#128

"Appart from the undemocratic stance of the unionist parties if they do not allow a referendum on independence and want the will of parliament."

You appear confused - there is nothing undemocratic about the majority of a parliament preventing a referendum going through.

The MSPs were democratically elected, so if the majority of those democratically elected MSPs vote against a bill or proposal that is democracy.

What would be undemocratic is if a minority government forces through a bill against the will of parliament.
112

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 10:37:28
130 Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

I am unaware of the content of your posts which you believe engendered “semi-abuse”, however, I’m sure that even if your local library in Kent does not carry any copies of the SNP manifesto, you can access this by referring to SNP.org and following the relevant links.
113

John S,

17/06/2009 10:37:30
Iain Gray for FM, having not lead the Scottish Labour Party in a Scottish Parliament election, this reminds me of Gordon Brown the PM who also hasn't lead the Labour Party in a UK general election.
114

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 10:37:37
All the pointless bickering can be alleviated by holding a referendum every 30 years, limited to no more than five questions, which should be derived from suggestions from the public. No doubt hanging politicians will prove popular.

115

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 10:38:19
63
Media at One

"Only now in the last decade or so are we beginning to hear rumblings..."

If you are only hearing those rumblings now it may be because the rumblings have grown to a clamour.

Or it may be because you have had your head embedded in your own fundament all this time.

116

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 17/06/2009 10:39:29
135 Undemocratic as in none of the unionist parties had Calman in there manifesto's and seeked a mandate from the people for these proposals.

Calman was a panic to the SNP government and the national conversation.

All three are running scared, christ Alex Salmond must go to bed laughing each night and rubbing his hands about the coming day.

On all grounds a referendum is required, obviously the unionist parties are very scared of this.
117

Soloman,

Stirling 17/06/2009 10:39:47
12
Innesm Austin
The proposed Referendum will be all about North Sea Oil & Gas revenue. Great Britain cannot afford an Independent Scotland without some guarantee they'll still have access to North Sea tax revenues.

So who exactly are THEY?


Break Free

X Vote SNP X

Independence from Westminster ( THEY? )
118

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 17/06/2009 10:40:21
#128
That is a very good point. They believe they have a mandate, and there is no need for a referendum.

Therefore after next years GE and the following Holyrood elections in 2011, if the SNP have the majority of MP's and MSP's, they can just go ahead and start negotiations with Westminster regarding Scotland withdrawal from the Act of Union.

Looks like the unionist parties are very, very short-sighted. You can be certain that after these elections, the unionist parties will be screaming for a referendum. In fact, you can be certain that Westminster will demand a referendum.

The unionist parties only want a referendum when they want to STOP something.
119

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 10:41:52
#128, 135

Hmmm, Democracy.

I have yet to understand how our system is Democratic.

When you consider that the Original Mantra of Democracy was By, For and With the People and is now By, For and OF the People . . .

And how is it democratic that we get a say 1 Day out of every 1800 (ave).

That is NOT Democracy
120

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 10:42:41
#136

Thanks, was not aware it existed
121

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 17/06/2009 10:45:47
Is it not ironic that, over the past 30 years, every "clever", deliberate ploy that Labour have used to thwart the SNP and counter the move to Scottish independence, has achieved the exact opposite result that was intended.

Devolution, PR, Holyrood Building, Party-funding rules, Edinburgh trams etc etc - all came back to haunt Labour big time.

Callman will be no exception.
122

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 10:47:06
75
Grahamski

"The SNP, who managed to attract 17% of the electorate, refused to take part."

Not strictly true. The fact that the unionist cabal prohibited Calman from considering the independence option made it politically impossible for the SNP to participate. The party of government, elected by the Scottish people, was effectively excluded.

Just one of the reasons why the Calman Commission lacks both validity and credibility.

123

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 10:47:32
#142

"Therefore after next years GE and the following Holyrood elections in 2011, if the SNP have the majority of MP's and MSP's, they can just go ahead and start negotiations with Westminster regarding Scotland withdrawal from the Act of Union."

Due to the electoral system in the Scottish elections the SNP will never get a majority of MSPs - they would need to get 65 MSPs to get a majority - that is clearly never going to happen. Even at their most popular in 1999 Labour only managed 56 seats.
124

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 10:49:52
#145

"Is it not ironic that, over the past 30 years, every "clever", deliberate ploy that Labour have used to thwart the SNP and counter the move to Scottish independence, has achieved the exact opposite result that was intended. Devolution, PR, Holyrood Building, Party-funding rules, Edinburgh trams etc etc - all came back to haunt Labour big time."

How on earth were the Edinburgh trams intended to 'thwart the SNP' and stop independence?
125

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 17/06/2009 10:50:12
145 Indeed, do you think the SNP embedded deep sleepers in labour in the late 60's
126

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 10:51:05
In my opinion, post of the day goes to 'Daft Old Git' regarding broadband tax:

Daft Old Git, 17/06/2009 01:16:47
I've never used a computer and never will. Why should I pay?

Knocks the socks off anything on this thread!
127

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 10:53:42
#148 Yeah1

Not being from Scotland I don't know the in's and out's of this but it strikes me that the 'Trams' were intended as a Sop to the Electorate.

"Look what we've done for you" type stylee thing
128

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 10:55:09
145
Luigiana

"Is it not ironic that, over the past 30 years, every "clever", deliberate ploy that Labour have used to thwart the SNP and counter the move to Scottish independence, has achieved the exact opposite result that was intended."

This is because the British Labour Party views the Scottish electorate as a flock of sheeple who can be easily manipulate with threats, promises and baubles. For decades, they have been somewhat justified in this ill-opinion by the apparent readiness of Scottish voters to turn a blind eye to BLP lies, incompetence and corruption.

The British Labour Party has not changed. The people of Scotland have.

129

frank mcbride,

lusitania 17/06/2009 10:56:15
#108, Rules..............

You have completely lost it!!!

At the last electoral test (Euro & E. local) less than 35% of the electorate excercised their franchise.

Did it make a blind bit of difference???

The UK Government Party received less than 15% of the vote. Even they cannot claim "mid-term blues", but the can claim to make our laws without reference to the people.

This is the "Democracy" you're advocating!!!

Under those rules, to answer your question, if only 10 people voted and 6 voted YES to Independence then, Independence would be legitimate.

I'm in favour of Independence, but I would not accept such a result; you, by your actions, would have to.
130

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 10:58:10
Transferring reserved powers to Holyrood would be all well and good IF and ONLY IF those at Holyrood were capable of taking responsibility for their use.

All evidence at present suggests that if they had the power to do so, the likes of MacAskill, Robison and Stevenson would turn Scotland into a conformist nanny state within a year or two.

As far as I am concerned, the less power Holyrood have at the moment, the better.
131

,

17/06/2009 10:59:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
132

TWC,

exLabour 17/06/2009 10:59:53
we will either have a referendum with positive options in 2010 or we will have a landslide to the Nats in 2011
133

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 11:01:59
150
The Tin Man

"In my opinion, post of the day goes to 'Daft Old Git' regarding broadband tax:

Daft Old Git, 17/06/2009 01:16:47
I've never used a computer and never will. Why should I pay?"

Daft Old Git is well named. And you are just as daft. What is being talked about here is an improvement to the infrastructure of the country. Which is something we all share and benefit from either directly or indirectly.

Were we all as short-sighted, narrow-minded and shallow of thought as you and your daft pal, there would be no rail network, no road network, no telephone network, no NHS, no libraries, no emergency services...

134

frank mcbride,

lusitania 17/06/2009 11:02:29
#120, Yeah 1.

You seem incapable of understanding the difference between a MAJORITY Government and a MINORITY Government.

The real problem with the Westminster Government is is overwhelming MAJORITY having received, only, 35% of the popular vote.
135

TWC,

exLabour 17/06/2009 11:03:34
This Calman thing will be judges at the by elections. The people will have their say whether the Parties like it or not.
The Libdems need to be particularly careful, I for one was hoping they would fight for more powers and Control over Gas & Oil.
136

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 11:04:24
154
Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head

"All evidence at present suggests..."

Ill-informed prejudice does not count as evidence.

137

preddo53,

Leeds 17/06/2009 11:04:25
I think Salmond should declare UDI, it worked for Rhodesia.
138

TWC,

exLabour 17/06/2009 11:05:28
157 Electric Hermit,

why don't they add the tax to computers or Bropadband charges??
139

brownlie,

17/06/2009 11:06:10
The Tin Man

Yes, that posting was on a par with a poster on here whose posts are consistently anti-SNP and pro-union asking "What makes you think I'm a unionist?"
140

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 11:07:10
#157 Hermit

Your opinion is trounced by Daft Old Git's sense of humour.
141

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 11:07:52
#157

Erm . . . Tin Man was referring to Daft Old Git saying "I've never used a computer and never will. Why should I pay?" when he quite patently was using a computer to post the post saying " I've never used a computer and never will . . . "
142

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 11:09:14
#163 Brownlie

'Pro multiculturalist', please.
143

Yeah1,

17/06/2009 11:10:09
#158

"You seem incapable of understanding the difference between a MAJORITY Government and a MINORITY Government."

Whether they are majority or minority governments is irrelevant - they are still governments, and were both still formed with a very small percentage of the popular vote. If it is a farce that one of them is a government then it is a farce that the other is too.

"The real problem with the Westminster Government is is overwhelming MAJORITY having received, only, 35% of the popular vote."

Yes thats the problem with FPTP.
144

frank mcbride,

lusitania 17/06/2009 11:10:10
#130, Neal..............

Thank you for your gracious reply.

With respect to the SNP Draft Constitution for an Independent Scotland, you can google it or have a look on www,snp.org.
145

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 11:14:02
151 Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

“Not being from Scotland I don't know the in's and out's of this”

And your reason for posting on this forum is what exactly?
146

brownlie,

17/06/2009 11:15:32
166 The Tin Man

Pro-SNP then?
147

Alan B,

17/06/2009 11:16:27
#Yeah1

You avoided my point.

There are 2 ways to take a decision with changes to the constitution.

1)referendum
2)parliamentary majority

As such if the unionist parties say no to a referendum (which many think is the best way to decide the issue and the only democratic way) then the issue has to be decided by the general election.

As in this case scotland will/should have independence if the snp get a majority of the seats in scotland.




148

John S,

17/06/2009 11:16:42
One way to try and force a referendum on independence is use the rules, force a vote of no confidence on the referendum bill/FM and if lost the FM resigns then Annabel Goldie and Travish Scott could anoint Iain Gray or anyone else as the FM or a Scottish Parliament election will follow.

I like it, Iain Gray as FM going into the May 2011 elections explaining why he is FM because he wouldn't allow the Scottish voters a referendum, this after the next UK GE.

Then having to explain the Calman report and why the Scottish voters were not allowed a referendum on that ?

SNP again become the majority party in Scotland after the 2011 SP elections.

Go for it Iain Gray our next First Minister.
149

,

17/06/2009 11:17:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
150

Phil C,

17/06/2009 11:20:11
We should set a date NOW for a referendum in May 2012, a year after the next Scottish election. Implement Calman in the meantime. That gives everyone the chance to prepare properly. We can see what difference Calman makes and the SNP can be judged on a proper track record in government. If they improve their position in 2011 then things will be interesting. If they don't then the unionists will have won the argument in any case!
151

Alan B,

17/06/2009 11:20:36
#TWC

The lib dems have a decent enough message on the constitution but no back bone to actually push through their beliefs.

It was one thing creating a weak scottish parliament to get it off the ground but down right silly to support such a weak progress of the sp powers when they belief in a strong sp within the uk with most taxation devolved.
152

frank mcbride,

lusitania 17/06/2009 11:21:13
#167, Yeah 1.

Yeah! That reply is consistent with most of your utterances.

Completely lacking in logic.

BTW, how does a MINORITY Government get policies through Parliament????????
153

The Busman,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 11:21:51
#131 Electric Hermit

[1] In 1707, Scotland was broke. I didn't think that that is seriously in dispute.

[2]As for your comments as to Edinburgh, again: my thesis is that support for independence in the Edinburgh is a lot weaker than elsewhere in Scotland, but we don't have a regional breakdown of the polling (and we need one). There is a huge English minority here, not that I'm part of it.

[3] To clarify: my take on things is that people are well aware of the SNP's goal of independence; but that they have been voting for them for other reasons - notably a dislike of Labour and the Lib Dems. My thesis - which I have put up here for debate - is that support for the SNP should *not* be taken as support for an independent Scotland.

And finally, what would the SNP do if it had a referendum on independence and lost?
154

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 11:25:35
#169

Because I can.

Because this is one of the few BBS that you can post to on any subject and have a good, reasonably intelligent debate.

Because we don't get told about Scottish Affairs down here in Kent.

Because WHEN you Secede from the UK it will cause problems for us down here. Our Taxes will rise because your Taxes will go elsewhere etc etc etc.

I do hope you're not going to get Anti-English on my ass . . .
155

John S,

17/06/2009 11:30:16
Scottish Parliament elections - 2003
2003 17.1% of the total electorate voted Scottish Labour or 34.6% of the actual votes cast was for Scottish Labour.


156

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 11:31:25
Well, I'm Gone. Have a pleasant day.

dunedin bully wee 1877 I look forward to an answer from you an' will check back later

Ciao all X
157

TWC,

exLabour 17/06/2009 11:32:14
177 The Busman,

Apply the option that won, however I would suggest that the Calman proposal will not win the support of Scots.

The union will need a bigger stick to beat the independence option.
158

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 11:41:43
177 The Busman,

“my thesis is that support for independence in the Edinburgh is a lot weaker than elsewhere in Scotland”


Euro Elections 2009
City of Edinburgh
Total Votes : 114,518
SNP : 24,417
Cons: 21,823
Lab: 15,589
Lib-Dems: 19,799

Are you sure about your assertation above?
159

Allan(handofgod137),

17/06/2009 11:42:13
Lets have a referendum as soon as possible, and lets see the gnats put their money where their mouths are and include the scrap the diddy parly in the list of options!
160

Mèths,

17/06/2009 11:47:44
183

Eh? The gnats want a referendum. The gnatless don't.

161

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 11:50:21
I have long wondered why politicians are generally so scared of referendums .....

It is almost like the people are 'meddling' with THEIR plans !

Referendums give direct power and choice to the people - there should be far more of them!!

We cannot trust our politicians to do anything else than line their own pockets and sell our freedoms and liberties for hidden agendas and ego trips.
162

The Busman,

17/06/2009 11:50:45
#182

My argument is that support for independence is *not* the same as support for the SNP. That is what I am trying to test. That said, I am surprised at the size of the Conservative vote.
163

The Strategist,

17/06/2009 11:53:31
Listening to Scottish question time at Westminster I understand that the Scottish Govt have already or plan to prevent Scottish civil servants becoming involved in the proposed Calman steering committee.

I would say this was a sensible move. Scottish civil servants have enough to do working with Scottish Ministers in rebuilding the Scottish economy following it's destruction by the Labour Govt and I admire the determination of the Scottish Govt to ensure they are not diverted into wasting their valuable time on the Calman project.
164

frank mcbride,

lusitania 17/06/2009 12:01:30
#177, The Busman.

To attempt to answer your questions:

1. Scotland, at the time of the Union, was in a perilous financial state.

This, however, can mainly be laid at the door of the aggressive acts of the English Parliament, aided essentially by Holland, using privateers and the English and Dutch navies to prevent Scots traders trading.

2. Edinburgh is predominantly non-SNP voting.

In the last test of public opinion (Euro election), the SNP won the biggest share of the votes in Edinburgh & the Lothians.
This, obviously, does not necessarily mean support for Independence but, it does suggest that more people are happier to vote for a Party whose main aim is Independence.

3. Not all voters who vote SNP support Independence.

You are correct. However, in the absence of a Referendum, the only sources of reference we have are OPs.
In most breakdowns, 86% of SNP supporters say they would vote for Independence. For other Parties support for Independence ranges from 16%(Lab) to 9% (Tory).

Referendum defeat.

The SNP would continue to promote its policy of Independence.
165

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 12:02:15
Salmond may be an opportunist but he is certainly not a cynical one. He's bloody good at it.
166

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 12:02:34
178 Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

“I do hope you're not going to get Anti-English on my ass”

That comment would appear to be aimed at me.

I can assure you that whatever pets you may have are entirely safe from me, wherever they may come from.

I would however respectfully suggest that before you decide to post again on subjects upon which you know nothing about, you may expect to be derided.

I have let you off lightly.
167

Golden1,

Alba 17/06/2009 12:12:22
Why has the comment box on Jim Devine been removed?
168

Mèths,

17/06/2009 12:17:19
191

Devine intervention?
169

Mèths,

17/06/2009 12:18:07
I've not refreshed the Devine thread. It stands at 111 comments. Anything in particular?
170

JCA REID,

Annan 17/06/2009 12:20:24
Time to ditch Calman & this "Parish Council" & have a proper Parliament. It is all Westminster pi**ing down our backs & telling us it's rain.
If we were such a drain on resources, they would have ditched Scotland years ago!!
All they are worried about is the 80% of the oil & gas revenues they'd lose when, under International Law, clearly states would be Scotland's share. FACT!!
171

alanh,

ek 17/06/2009 12:21:15
The Calman tax changes and REMOVING the 3p in the pound variance that is enshrined in the current devo package that was ratified thru referendum surely means a referendum is needed for the constitutional changes it brings?

And since we need to hold a referendum anyway we can include independence in it and let the people really chose. Its the only positive thing to come out of this wee political game the unionist alliance have played
172

Mèths,

17/06/2009 12:23:14
Sorry - you said "comment box" not "comments"

It's been removed because you've been banned! Mine is still there.
173

The Busman,

Back to Frank McBride, #188 17/06/2009 12:28:34
Thank you - your comments do shed some more light on the matter.

I stand by my earlier comments about a culture of dependence in Scotland, as I wonder whether it is providing significant impedance (in the form of the Scottish Labour vote) to the independence cause.
174

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 12:33:59
191 Try refreshing, or going into the article via the sidebar. That's one of the little quirks of this site you have to jump around like a russian gymnast from time to time to actually be able to comment.
175

Media at One,

17/06/2009 12:34:59
Britain has been independent forever - and as Brit I am happy with that.
Where do we draw the line? Independence for Scotland, independence for Glasgow, independence for FIFE etc Anyone can create a natonalist movement you just need to find a disallusioned person with enough time on their hands to promote it. Then you sit back and watch the blinkered flock arrive for their red hot poker a$$ branding. A big SNP right across the er$e, never to far from being in the sh!t.
176

Mèths,

17/06/2009 12:37:28
Medium

"Independence for Scotland, independence for Glasgow, independence for FIFE"

As yesterday - Glasgow & Fife aren't countries. Are you mad?
177

Mèths,

17/06/2009 12:38:25
Medium tedium

I've read the rest of your post. Mad it is.
178

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 12:38:59
199 Media Scotland was a seperate entity before the union (which was as we know a mere 302 years ago). We are not proposing to form a new country, just re-instate an old one.
179

Arfur,

17/06/2009 12:44:10
#1 Hagbard Celine - "I don't think these changes amount to much"...so no need for a referendum then. Idiot. - it is precisely because of things like this that we do need a referendum.

Idiot.
180

Golden1,

Alba 17/06/2009 12:46:14
Sorry about that.Couldn't,or wasn't allowed to get back on.I think,although this might just be a hunch,they don't like anti-unionist comments.A previous incarnation of myself can sign in but not comment?
As for chairman mao go away or we'll turn the lights on you troll
181

tomislav,

home 17/06/2009 12:46:23
183, you are right, lets have this referendum as soon as possible and finally shut up this nonsense of independence, oh when oh when will these kilted clowns ever go away ,,,, oh and I didnt think of you other excellent point, to scrap this "jobs for the boys" "Scottish Government" ,,,, who gave them the right to "govern" me!!! I had a Government, its in Westminster, thanks lads, but I dont need another, get rid of them
182

Golden1,

Alba 17/06/2009 12:49:29
206 lavvies tom
You are as your name suggests a busted flush
183

Willie Mor,

17/06/2009 12:52:18
Listen up people - Brown and the Labour party don't do referenda.Nor do they do elections,unless forced to do so.

Calman may reflect the views of the united unionist opposition but there is no way that Brown will put it to a vote.

The clenched fist and heavy boot of rotten Westminster government just goes on and on.

184

vcmoksfmofesamofaim,

Far away 17/06/2009 12:52:20
#177

Busman: "And finally, what would the SNP do if it had a referendum on independence and lost?"

Be real. No serious political party should let itself get manipulated into answering such a negative hypothetical in advance of a poll. The time for that sort of question would be after the referendum in the event of a defeat. On the other hand, nobody ever seems to ask the unionist cabal what they would you do if they lose. Funny that.
185

Mèths,

17/06/2009 13:04:07
tomislav

"Kilted clowns"

Another cretin.
186

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 13:06:52
Is there any connection between Loyalists, Unionists, Fascists and racists in NI?

Just wondered.
187

frank mcbride,

lusitania 17/06/2009 13:11:31
#197, The Busman.

There is a dependency culture in Scotland, but it must be seen in its historical context.

This dependence, of some, is directly related to Westminster policies, particularly over the past 40ish years.

Before the 70s there were sufficient, reasonably paying, jobs which were filled by Scots, young and old.
There was very little need for top-up benefits.

Since the 70s, under successive Labour and Tory Governments, the employment situation has deteriorated dramatically - the same can be said of large parts of England & Wales.
The failure of Westminster to encourage retooling and modern industrial practice, coupled with the drive of Thatcher, Blair and Brown towards a primarily service economy, created a "rich get richer" and "the poor get poorer" society.

This society created a division in society.

This division, rather than being addressed, was disguised. Westminster, instead of insisting on a proper living wage, instituted a dependency culture through means-tested benefits.

This, in turn, led to people staying out of employment because it was more beneficial.

Will this dependency culture affect the movement to Independence?

That depends on the aspiration of the SG.

But, I have hopes that this SNP administration is moving in the right direction; only last week the SNP Government announced 4000 new jobs, 1870 of them high-waged jobs (non-financial).
The only way forward, out of dependency, is to create a society where it is more profitable, for those of working age, to be in work rather than on benefit.

It is also easier to deal with the various substance abuses if people have meaningful employment.
188

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 13:14:57
211 Am I missing it ? I can't see any coverage of these disgraceful events in Belfast in this paper.
189

IainGlasgow,

17/06/2009 13:15:18
A third option referendum question on what would amount to Fiscal Autonomy as proposed by the Steel Commission (and probably the Lib Dems preferred option if the had the stomach to push it) would obfuscate the independence question to an extent and would probably end up being the preferred choice.

Instead Calman has gifted the SNP an open playing field. Even if its agreed that Calman's reccommendations are included in a referendum (which I doubt since Brown and Murphy appear poised to dive head first into the shallow end with them before the general election) they are really just tinkering around the edges of the 'tartan tax' and including a couple of areas of populist legislation like firearms.

Without corporation tax the Scottish parliament will not be empowered to render any real economic improvments and as such Calman's reccommendations will meet a cold response in the business community. There is also the taking back to Westminster of powers over company winding up.

Calman's silence over the issue of veto on new nuclear power stations is deafening.

The SNP will be able to tear Calman to shreds in both the general election campaign and any referendum campaign, exposing it further as the cynical unionist bribe that it is.
190

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 17/06/2009 13:17:42
#148 Yeah1

"How on earth were the Edinburgh trams intended to 'thwart the SNP' and stop independence?"

The unionists pushed through the tram project for two main reasons, firstly because they considered that the people of Edinburgh would be eternally grateful. The second, more devious reason was that they wanted to tie the SNP minority government down by effectively removing half a billion pounds from their budget (they promised to scrap the trams in 2007, remember)?

Well, the trams are now on the way, chaotically. Huge disruptions and likely to go way over budget. The people of Edinburgh (and the rest of Scotland) are well pizzed. For the SNP, a golden excuse on a plate for not honouring their manifesto commitments. "Labour made us waste one billion on the trams".

On the enormous subject of Labour cockups, I also forgot to mention the two budget fiascos, courtesy of Wendy Alexander and Ian Gray.

Don't you just love it when Labour "cleverness" backfires spectacularly!
191

IainGlasgow,

17/06/2009 13:18:51
#206

75% of people in Scotland voted in favour of devolution. That's why you have two governments.

A year from now David Cameron will be governing you with (unless there is a massive revival of Tory support in Scotland in the coming months) much less of a mandate than Alex Salmond has.
192

bluehead,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 13:24:31
Alex Salmond better get hi digital brain working overtime,it would seem to me that there is dirty tricks floating about in the air
there is numerous con-tricks being exercised in the proposals,the other political plonkers are trying to surround SNP,
it is time to be free from the those people in westminster
this labour goverment have turned into a national disease,they seem to spreading viruses everywhere!!!!!
193

IainGlasgow,

17/06/2009 13:26:24
#199

"Britain has been independent forever" - WTF??

Britain has only existed as a country for 300 years and parts of it have been conquered on a number of occasions prior to that, not least by the Roman Empire and even they couldn't subdue Scotland, we had to do that to ourseleves in the end. Nevertheless most people abroad don't know the difference between Britain and England.

In an EU context independence is a relative term.
194

nova albion 3,

England. 17/06/2009 13:28:48
Enough is Enough,we have tried our damndest,for the love of Englands sanity GIVE THEM THEIR FLAMEING REFERENDUM and be done with it. You can't please all the people all of the time,but hells bells, we can't please salmond any of the time.
195

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 17/06/2009 13:37:20
A referendum just isn't for christmas it's for life!

So again we go full circle with our unionist pals we don't need a referendum.....


Because we are scared of the result.
196

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 17/06/2009 13:38:03
219 You lost?
197

,

17/06/2009 13:39:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
198

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 13:42:10
219 Very revealing ''Give them their referendum'' (it's flaming btw no 'e') as if it is a gift and not a demand.
199

,

17/06/2009 13:42:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
200

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 17/06/2009 13:45:12
224 is Nova aka Kimba the mad fly swotter
201

The Master,

17/06/2009 13:50:29
The Nats really are surpassing themselves with their nonsense. Two quick points:

1. Unlike their separation policy, the Calman Recommendations have broad support across the political spectrum. Why, therefore, do they need to be put to a referendum?

2. The truth is that the Nats only wish to put Calman to a referendum so that they can use their rigged and meaningless "consultative" referendum question while acting like they're being fair and open minded.

Quite frankly, the Nats have now gone beyond the point of ridicule in their desperation to promote their separation nonsense. The Master has spoken and he will be heard!
202

,

17/06/2009 13:51:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
203

vcmoksfmofesamofaim,

Far away 17/06/2009 13:55:15
226

Can you explain what is 'rigged' about the SNP's proposed referendum question? As I've understood it, I thought it was more or less the only question they could legally ask under the terms of the Scotland Act. And, remind me, who framed that exactly?
204

,

17/06/2009 13:58:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
205

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 13:59:06
226 Don't you think it's a bit strange that the unionist parties came up with the Calman commission without anybody voting for it ? It's a startling ommission from their manifestos I would have thought, given that we are talking about constitutional change which requires both Parliaments participation.

Now how did they manage to miss that out their ''list of things to do '' when they were standing for election. Did it slip their minds ?

I think if we are talking about desperate rigging we don't have that far to look.
206

Phil o Brian,

17/06/2009 14:03:31
Scotland has too many layers of Govt for a 5m population.
Either go independant or revert back to Westmister with more powers pushed down to local authorities.
What we have at the moment is the worst of all worlds and Calman just makes it worse.
I can't understand why you would want to adopt Calman, its just more fudge.
207

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 14:03:47
So who is fri/gging in the rigging then ? Answers on a postcard please.
208

LEAL,

17/06/2009 14:05:11
And why shouldnt this matter be decided by referendum?Why should London,England decide what money Scotland should get.
209

,

17/06/2009 14:09:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
210

Mèths,

17/06/2009 14:12:54
Possible reason for putting Calman on a proposed referendum is that Tavish "may" support it.

"Sources close to Mr Salmond acknowledged, however, that the First Minister’s offer yesterday was aimed more at the Liberal Democrats than either Labour or the Conservatives, because Tavish Scott, on the day last year that he became the Scottish Lib Dem leader, indicated that he would back a multioption vote. "

Times
211

Davie08,

Edinburgh 17/06/2009 14:24:01
Anybody spot the irony of tens of thousands on the streets in Tehran waving placards with the legend 'where's my vote?' Just a thought.
212

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 14:28:27
Interesting that all the unionists are supporting Calman and more powers for the Scottish Parliament.

The seem to prefer the gradualist approach to independence which is fine and an honorable stance to take.

10 years ago they were sreaming that the world was going to collapse when Scotland got a parliament..now they are backing more powers and defending Calman.

Something seems to have changed....and it isn't the nationalist stance!
213

RampantRedLion,

Stirling 17/06/2009 14:29:34
There is not one valid argument against having a referendum. If the unionists keep saying that they will prevent a vote, they might find that after the next election they won't have enough MSPs to prevent it. They should stand up for their principles and trust the Scottish people to do the right thing. If they start trusting us we may, eventually, start to trust them.
214

Stan Butler,

17/06/2009 14:33:06

#228 vcmoksfmofesamofaim

'Can you explain what is 'rigged' about the SNP's proposed referendum question?'


The wording of the question was decided on after extensive research in to how the question could best be phrased to produce the answer the gnats wanted.

That is what is meant by the question being rigged.

Are the gnats prepared to publish the research carried out in to how the question should be worded?

If not, why not?


215

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 14:33:52
#230 Observer

"226 Don't you think it's a bit strange that the unionist parties came up with the Calman commission without anybody voting for it ?"

The Calman commission was set up after a vote of the Scottish Parliament - hard to remember now, but it was back in the days when Holyrood held votes on stuff, instead of doing things by dictatorial fiat.
216

,

17/06/2009 14:34:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
217

,

17/06/2009 14:36:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
218

The Master,

17/06/2009 14:37:25
#228: it's incomprehensible and soft peddles the serious consequences of separation with waffle about "negotiations", so it's rigged.

It might be the only question that can be asked, but why ask it if so doing can only defeat the purpose of democracy?
219

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 14:48:24
What is this campaign for a 'consultative' referendum? A 'consultative' referendum is a non-binding referendum. Sounds pretty pointless, and woolly.

220

,

17/06/2009 14:58:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
221

Media at One,

17/06/2009 14:59:44
The SNP are pushing for independence but if they dont get it, will they stop pressing for independence and respect the will of the people?

222

Jimmy Le Pie,

17/06/2009 15:00:33
I must say it's a brilliant reaction from most of the unionists on here.

Entirely predictable the way they're getting bent out of shape!

Keep up the good work Alex(and your first class team!)
223

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 15:04:54
#63 Media at One: Aye right! When was this? The likes of Brownies and Scouts doesnae count cause the bairns dinnae ken what they are saying. (And their was no part about any country/union in the Brownies oath)

Is it no the Americans that Pledge allegiance to their flag and country?

Yer funny, totally love the way you take facts form other countries all over the world and then pass them off as facts and traits of Scotland and the Scots.
224

Jimmy Le Pie,

17/06/2009 15:08:44
#248 Eve,

I thought we all had to swear allegiance to Our Dear Leader, Comrade Broon and the Butcher's Apron on "Britishness Day" that Comrade Broon announced a few months ago???
I think all school kids had to pledge loyalty to the Apron as well!

Aye right!!!
225

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 15:09:00
#246 Media

"The SNP are pushing for independence but if they dont get it, will they stop pressing for independence and respect the will of the people?"

They are only respecting the will of the members of the party. Referenda would continue ad infinitum, until we are bored into separation.
226

Media at One,

17/06/2009 15:10:19
Jimmy Le Pie

In terms of being bent out of shape, that is a nationalist problem. As it stands, I am British and so are you, end of story!
Independence is so far away and even then, maybe never. Sure the signs are that Scottish folk are becomming more agitated with Westminster but to get them to vote away their British status will be more difficult than you can imagine.
Speaking about SCOTTISH PRIDE in the pub with your mates because you feel you must to avoid conflict is one thing, ticking the box is quite another.
I am a fan of the union, but independence does not scare me, not at all. When you make your bed you need to lie in it and if the people chose independence then I will respect their decision. I will still be British because I am certain that I will be able to denounce my Scottish identity in favour of the one that I was born with? British Citizen for life.
I actually need to look into that - If Scotland votes for independence how do I go about maintaining my British status. Legally nobody can take it away, not even a referendum can.
227

Media at One,

17/06/2009 15:11:30
The Tin Man #250

So likewise, the unionists can campaign for a return to the union if independence comes about?
228

,

17/06/2009 15:13:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
229

Yeti,

17/06/2009 15:14:16
#244
It's hard to argue that a consultative referendum is pointless when the last devolution referendum was exactly that - consultative. The terms of the devolution were cobbled together after the event.
230

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 15:16:39
#251 Media

Apparently, the SNP would let you choose if you wanted a UK passport, or a Scottish one. Personally, I would prefer both, and the one I already have.
231

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 15:16:59
#71 BIG EYE: Aye we do now!!!

#74 TWC: Aye I know what you mean, they've cond us so many times in the past that this could only be a pretendy power.

#93 Luigiana: Bet ye thats something Wendy regreats saying!!!
232

awantapassport,

sunnysoothcoast 17/06/2009 15:17:38
251 Media - Interesting point about maintaining your British status. However, would Great Britain exist without Scotland? Would the United Kingdom exist without Scotland? considering it would only contain one recognised nation, England, and two annexed regions.
233

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 15:17:50
#190

Dunedin - thanks for going easy on me :-)

If'n I don't come on sites like this, and make the odd far-cup it's true (sorry), how will I and people like me learn about what's happening in Scotland?

I know more about what's happening in Iran for gods sake!
234

Media at One,

17/06/2009 15:19:47
If I am able to maintain my British Passport I have no problem -
235

,

17/06/2009 15:20:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
236

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 15:24:23
#254 Yeti

"The terms of the devolution were cobbled together after the event."

That is the same 'plan' that the exec have for any separation terms, and agreements. They want to ask the electorate if they can go off and cobble together these things, but not hold any popular vote on the results of their cobbling, in case of 'confusion'.

237

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 15:28:24
#249 Jimmy Le Pie: Aye, cooking with the bairns has always been messy. Best they get the flour, eggs etc. on the apron than their school uniform.

That must be how they swear allegiance in school the day!!!
238

Jimmy Le Pie,

17/06/2009 15:29:36
#251 Media,

I have never considered myself british, only ever Scottish. I do have a british passport which I would happily bin as soon as I get my Scottish one

Great Britain is a discredited union of unequal parts that is well past it's sell by date.

Evan at the D Day celebrations, Comrade Broon was introduced, by some ex army type, as prime minister of england.

So I'm sure there won't be many tears shed at the demise of the union down south.
Just the knuckle dragging hordes that turn up at Ibrox and a few disturbed Royalists.

Then we'll wonder what all the fuss was about!!
239

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 15:31:22
#257 wanapassportorethree

The treaty of crowns would remain in place, Liz2 would remain the sovereign head of the Scottish State, and we would be part of the United Kingdoms of GB.

#259 Media

The tax evasion possibilities for company directors could be quite interesting.
240

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 15:35:02
#261 The Tin Man:
Devolved power is given and therefore whats on offer can and should be shown in advance. And if it's no then it is clear that they weren't willing to give any thing in the first place.

Independence is taken and will ovbously lead to us controlling oor own country BUT the full agreement on independence will never be known until we take back what is oors.
241

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 15:40:03
241 Rt Hon*

Well it will be every interesting to see the Tories after Cameron has been elected as they will then be in excatly the same position that Scottish Labour are in at the moment.

You just can't serve 2 masters and the Tories will soon have to justify the English Conservatives governance of Scotland and they will be naturally as sycophantic as Labour in Scotland are at the moment.

I am guessing that Labour will eventually drift 'softly' towards independence once they realise that they are finished in Westminster (especially the jock contingent).

As for AM2 i believe things are so bad in the second-hand car market that he can no longer afford his internet connection or his yearly excursion to the proms....sad times!
242

Media at One,

17/06/2009 15:40:23
Jimmy Le Pie

Clearly you know little about Scotland - The Union and Irish flag flying masses at football have a completely different agendas for flying those flags - Independence isnt one of them.

In terms of my Passport, mine says born in Scotland but my nationality is British and always will be. I would not want a Scottish Passport, I have no need for one.
243

awantapassport,

joost the wan passport 17/06/2009 15:40:31
264 - Point taken, the UK would exist as a sovereign entity only, but not Great Britain as a sovereign state. That was only due to the 1707 Act of Union... and surely she should be Elizabeth I of Scotland II of England...
244

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 15:42:44
#263 Jimmy Le Pie: The word is Shred no bin!! Remeber the ID theifes that look in the bins. Theres also the add pleasure of tearing in half.

Though I think I might hang on to mine as something to show my bairns (When I have them) and Gandweans(when I have them).
245

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 15:44:42
And at least I'm not like the poster at 219? Nova Albion 3

Stupid English attitude!

Sometimes I despair of my fellow countrymen.


246

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 15:47:51
#265 Eve

Independence, taken without negociation, reverts to the rather brief UN guidelines on successionist States, whereby all government property in Scotland becomes the property of what remains of the UK. Hence, the cobbling bit has some bearing.
247

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 15:49:20
267 Media*

You won't have a choice after independence. Your passport will be Scottish!

248

nova albion 3,

17/06/2009 15:49:33
222. Kimba,lia,maxi! I'm not any of them,but,they must of made an impact matey because you nats will not stop talking about them. As for the referendum,you do a lot of shouting about one,but when push comes to shove your as scared as hell.
249

nova albion 3,

17/06/2009 15:51:08
272. A loud mouthed scot in Russia,How quaint.
250

Media at One,

17/06/2009 15:51:28
Independence is going to be an interesting debacle. It will keep the journalists and the lawyers busy for decades.
All I want is the right to maintain my British Passport.
251

Media at One,

17/06/2009 15:53:08
Nevsky - Wrong, they will not be able to take away my British Passport - I will have an option of denouncing my Scottish status to become what is left of the UK -
I am British and that is that!
252

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 15:54:36
274 Nova*

The only loud mouthed ones here tend to be from your neck of the woods i am afraid.

253

Yeti,

17/06/2009 15:54:36
#268
I'm not sure that the UK would still exist as an entity. Upon independence, with the Queen was head of state, Scotland would have the same arrangement as, say, Canada or Australia, and they would never say they they are in the UK. In hact, if you look at an Oz passport, it's called the Commonwealth of Australia.
254

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 15:55:42
#272 Nevsky

"You won't have a choice after independence. Your passport will be Scottish!"

No, according to the SNP's draft publications on the matter, we do get a choice. Very gracious of them. It says that if you were born in Scotland, or are domiciled in Scotland on indy day, you get the choice between scotty citizy, or UKzey citizy.

I guess that if you weren't born in Scotty, and found yourself living in Moskva on the day, you would have to go through the naturalisation and citizenship proceedures.
255

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 15:56:43
#273

Nova Albion 3

Shut the hell up, really! It's people like you that give us English the bad name we have. Accept the FACT that Scotland WILL gain Independence and start living with it!!!

Kent born and bred!!!
256

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 15:57:48
#278 Yeti

Liz2 is the head of the Commonwealth. She is also the actual crowned head of State for England, and Scotland.
257

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 15:59:09
#110 Mèths: You've forgoten that the unionist believe that the dead will always vote for the right party. Where as the living just can't always be trusted.

#200 Mèths: Aye, Towns/Cities should never be mistaken for Countries. BUT the poor guy hasnae step foot in Scotland for what sounds like a century or two, judging by some comment made yesterday and the day. So they are obviously a bit clueless to what life in Scotland is like today.

#109 aljok.23: x
258

Yeti,

17/06/2009 15:59:44
#281
True, but at the coronation she was also crowned as head of state, not just of the UK countries, but also Canada etc.
259

Luke P,

Great Britain 17/06/2009 15:59:52
How long will Scotland have its cake and eat it? Please, Scotland, please s**t or get off the pot.
260

,

17/06/2009 16:01:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
261

nova albion 3,

17/06/2009 16:01:49
277. My neck of the woods! where would that be exactly?
262

awantapassport,

doonsooth 17/06/2009 16:02:03
278 - The Commonwealth of Scotland... hmmm
263

nova albion 3,

17/06/2009 16:03:08
284. Great post.
264

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 16:03:30
#283 Yeti

True - lucky girl.
265

awantapassport,

doonsooth 17/06/2009 16:06:01
284 - There's no much cake left tae eat... yoos huv hud it aw!!
266

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 16:06:24
#267 Media at One: "In terms of my Passport, mine says born in Scotland but my nationality is British and always will be"

Really!!! You have Scotland as place of brith? My passport has Glasgow as place of brith!!! Where you ashamed of yer city/town of brith when you filled out the form for the passpot?



267

European Scot,

17/06/2009 16:06:51
264 The Tin Man

Liz 2 of a Scottish State ?
Must be memory lapse, but I don't remember seeing anything about Liz 1 of a Scottish State in the history books.
Some number changes may be called for if this archaic institution is to be kept on.
In Scotland it's the people who are sovereign, not Royalty.
Independence does not mean the continuation of the United Kingdom, it will bring about the re-establishment of the country and Nation State of Scotland.
GB would be the initials of the ex prime minister of an equally defunct GB / 'UK'.

281 The Tin Man

"She is also the actual crowned head of State for England, and Scotland."

Again this may be memory loss, but was Liz actually crowned with the Scottish Crown, or was that ceremony conveniently avoided ?
268

Media at One,

17/06/2009 16:07:40
Eve -

Dont be so naive. We all know our Scotland. Sit in the Haymarket on match day and listen to the punters speak about their Weegie neighbours. Walk down Gorgie Road today and you will see at least 4 Union Jacks and an Tri Colour in various flat windows. Mind and stop of at Greggs for a wee pastry, but dont eat all the pies hen.
Yes as I was saying yesterday, Scotland suffers from an internal illness that independence will exacerbate. The Weegies as they are called in Edinburgh will not take kindly to the capital slander, they will feel alientated much the same as you do by the Westminster government.
It exists, you know it and I know it.
But anyway, as long as I get to keep my British Passport all is good. You can give my Scottish one to some nationalist nutter if you like.
269

Yeti,

17/06/2009 16:07:58
Plus, UK was only formed in 1707 with the Treaty of Union (or Act of Union if you're English), not in 1603 with the union of the crowns. The term UK only really came into common usage after the union with Ireland much later.
270

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 17/06/2009 16:08:00
#259

Erm, how do I say this?

You no longer have a British passport - you have a European one (with the queen's logo on it).

Scottish and European - what more could you ask for?
271

Luke P,

Great Britain 17/06/2009 16:08:13
Please SCOTLAND. You've put up with the tyrannous English yoke of autonomy in education, sports, law and religion for so long. You have a parliament now that we don't have. Poor, oppressed masses of Scotland rise up and take back your precious freedom. PLEASE! - AND THEN PLEASE SHUT UP AND LEAVE US ALONE.
272

European Scot,

17/06/2009 16:10:32
295 Luigiana

"Scottish and European - what more could you ask for?"

So true !
273

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 16:11:37
276 Media*

Good for you...proud to denounce your own country and remain British long after it has dissapeared.

What a bizarre parody for 300 years of the union you are!
274

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 16:11:37
#271 The Tin Man: If it's stationary and is in Scotland then it should belong to Scotland.

It should be common sense really!!!

We don't what or need the nuclear Weapons so therefore the English can have them and keep them in their own country.
275

Media at One,

17/06/2009 16:12:01
Eve - Glasgow you say - oh well then you are one of those weegies we speak about in the East.
Not sure I would be happy about being accused of living in a slum of losers. Of course I know that Glasgow is Scotland's top city in terms of fashion, shopping, clubbing etc. Glasgow is rich in culture, amazing greens and wonderful art galleries - a real treat is that city. But you know as well as I do, WEEGIE SCUM is the general term throughout Scotland and therein lies the internal battle.
276

awantapassport,

17/06/2009 16:13:36
296 - We never had to put up with your laws (or religion for that matter) - Do us all a favour, do a bit of research instead of trying to extract anti-English sentiments.
277

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 16:14:06
#296 Luke P

Take a look at my post 280 and apply it to yourself, there's a good chap
278

Media at One,

17/06/2009 16:14:30
Nevsky - Not really a parody! I am British, have been all my life. Why would I suddenly decide to change that? I am who I am and British is me.....
279

awantapassport,

sunnysoothcoast 17/06/2009 16:18:28
300 - The internal battle you talk of is mince! I was born in Glasgow and brought up in Livingston (overspill). There's a lot of people in between Edinburgh and Glasgow who don't share your bigoted views and those who do generally say so with a hint of a smile. Religious bigotry is a far worse taint on our nation.
280

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 17/06/2009 16:22:16
#303

Are you Scottish?
281

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 16:23:09
303 Media*

You are the one stating that you would consider denouncing your own country to remain British...that is a fairly discgraceful thing to say as far as i am concerned.

282

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 16:25:17
293 Media at One

It just so happens that this particular exiled “Weegie” was in Greggs on Gorgie Road this morning.

Unfortunately not for pastries, but for breakfast rolls. (If you time it right they sometimes have the rather good well-fired variety, reminiscent of the much lamented City Bakeries in Glasgow).

I never noticed any of those Butcher’s Aprons to which you refer, but I did see a copy a local newspaper with the following headlines:
Euro Elections 2009
City of Edinburgh
Total Votes : 114,518
SNP : 24,417
Cons: 21,823
Lab: 15,589
Lib-Dems: 19,799

Maybe I was in a different Gorgie Road to the one you are referring to?
283

Jimmy Le Pie,

17/06/2009 16:25:24
Media,

You really are very sad.

You have my sympathy and pity.
284

Allan(handofgod137),

17/06/2009 16:37:05
#184 The gnats under fatn'eck claim to want a referendum, but so far they've avoided setting a date. As a unionist I would love them to hold the referendum, as long as one of the options was "abolish the diddy parliment at holyrood". The gnats however don't actualy wish to hold the referendum, as they know they cannot get 50%+ of the electorate to back them, so they'll just continue talking a good game and taking the money.
285

Mèths,

17/06/2009 16:37:45
"So likewise, the unionists can campaign for a return to the union if independence comes about?

So far not one single country gaining independence from Britain has asked to come back.
286

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 16:42:20
#293 Media at One: " Walk down Gorgie Road today and you will see at least 4 Union Jacks and an Tri Colour in various flat windows." Nae thanks sounds like a certain area in the east end of Glasgow, which I've passed through many times in the past.

"Mind and stop of at Greggs for a wee pastry, but dont eat all the pies hen." What do Edinburgh Greggs make nicer tasting Pies than Glasgow Greggs. Here was me thinking that we lived in a day an age where most of the pasties, pies and cakes that large bakeries like Greggs made them delivered already made to each individual shop. The only thing they make in the shop is pieces and reheat.

"The Weegies as they are called in Edinburgh will not take kindly to the capital slander, they will feel alientated much the same as you do by the Westminster government."

I've been called a Weegie by an Edinburger in the past, but I don't dislike them and they didnae dislike me either. It was just a wee bit of banter. Shame a few folk like you take it personally.

So your point is that weegies like me will dislike oor self's if we are ruled by Edinburgh instead of Westminster. Well done that makes hunners of sense to me!!! Aye right, it's no like they're gonnae mak us eat Edinburgh Chippie offerings!!
287

Sgian Dubh,

17/06/2009 16:46:39
#211 dunedin,
Yes, there is a connection. Loyalists are very much Unionists by association that they want NI as part of United Kingdom, indeed some want it as a Little England. As for Nazis and Facists, I don't know. It is however rumoured in NI that the racists responsible for the attacks in the last few days agains immigrant Romanians are a faction of one of the Loyalist gangs (I never use the word 'paramilitaries') This assumption would make sense as they are all very pro-British. As usual, none of these 'brave' Loyalists have owned up or taken responsibility for this attrocious behaviour.
288

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 16:47:06
314 Eve,

If you go to the right “Chippie” they do offer salt and vinegar and even know what a “special” fish supper is.
289

awantapassport,

doonsooth 17/06/2009 16:50:48
316 - a miss the free broon sauce!!! ye dinna get it in the chippies doon here.
290

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 16:51:17
#300 Media at One: No I don't!! I've never been called "WEEGIE SCUM" in my life! Unless yer lableing me that right now, which would make it the first I've been called that.

AND I've lived in more than one area in Scotland.
291

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 16:56:42
Wow!!

Have just noticed that the post at #260 from Rt Rev has been removed.

All it said, in reply to my post at #258, was, if'n I remember aright,

#258 yup - Iran has a Democracy.

Why the Hell would Admin strike that?

What is with these Admin's?
292

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 16:57:53
sorry - Rt Hon
293

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 17:01:15
315 Sgian Dubh,

My question to which you responded was of course rhetorical.

It is interesting nonetheless to note that it is the nationalist community in Northern Ireland who have taken the Romanian people into their protection.

If ever my politics led me to threaten to cause harm to 5 day old weans, then I would give up and accept that the game was not worth the candle.
294

nova albion 3,

17/06/2009 17:02:47
302. No, it's people like you that allow Scotland to run rough shod over us. Did you know over 200 cancer patients died in England last year,WHY! BECAUSE WE IN ENGLAND DO NOT HAVE THE DRUGS THAT COULD OF SAVED THEM! You are either a wind-up to''er or you are a disgrace to England,if you love Scotland so much go and live there!
295

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 17:04:54
#312

True but I have heard occasionly on Radio 4/ World Service Indian Males say that they felt that India was better under the Raj.

Make of that what you will . . .
296

awantapassport,

17/06/2009 17:09:52
324 - You cannot claim it's Scotland's fault for English hospitals not having the drugs. Bring it up with your local Health Authority. I thought it was the Scots who had chips on their shoulders (or is that fish suppers).
297

morris,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 17:27:09
300

The referendum was always going to be held within the lifetime of this parliament.Until this parliament is terminated that remains the case. What part of its not over till the end do you not understand?

What part of they will honour an election committment do you not understand?
The SNP have never been afraid of a referendum and tried to have independence included in the options available during the last one.It was the Unionists who refused to ask the question, fearing the democratic decision of the people,and THATS A FACT OF HISTORY .

Labour's leader Wendy was in favour of a referendum (so she claimed) and her party was against it simultaneously !
Labour dont know whether they are coming or going half the time,but take my word for it THEY ARE GOING!
They have already gone.It's just that we still have some morons who think they can still win an election.
298

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 17:32:08
324

Those 200 people are dead because the Government does not fund the NHS nearly enough and the NHS spend WAY too much on Admin and pen-pushers!

The Scottish are rightly cheesed with us, (god I hate not being able to swear on this site), because over the centuries we have Murdered, Disenfranchised, Raped and Pillaged our way through Scottish Lands and History.

Even now we take their Oil and their Taxes, giving little in return. Their young men DIE for us in Iraq and Afghanistan, wars not of their choosing, wars that are Illegal.

And, as for me, I am Anglo-saxon - Body and Blood - and would Lay Down My Life for HRH Queen Elizabeth in an instant!!

Would you?
299

Mèths,

17/06/2009 17:35:25
I keep my passport safe in this:-

tinyurl.com/lszrpj
300

morris,

edinburgh 17/06/2009 17:36:01
324

When anything is devolved to Scotland (and/or Wales or Northern Ireland) it automatically means the Westminster parliament becomes tantamount to being devolved also in those matters , and deals with England only .

It cannot possibly be the fault of the Scottish parliament who have no legitimacy other than within Scotland. Similarly Scotland has 49 seats in a parliament which houses 600 plus nearly all of whom are elected by England.
Its impossible for what you say to be correct and a child with Primary 5 arithmetic should be able to see that !
301

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 17:36:01
324

Also:

"WHY! BECAUSE WE IN ENGLAND DO NOT HAVE THE DRUGS THAT COULD OF SAVED THEM"

It's "COULD HAVE" you ignoramus. How can you claim to be English when you can't even speak the Language properly?
302

Mèths,

17/06/2009 17:40:04
"I am British and that is that!"

Historically you're not. Britain in Roman times was England & Wales (roughly).
303

awantapassport,

sunnysoothcoast 17/06/2009 17:40:19
329 - I remember my first time going abroad when I was a kid. We left through England and the customs man made me take my Scottish Passport cover off. I can still see my Dad and Uncle arguing with him. I was dead proud of my special cover!
304

Mèths,

17/06/2009 17:46:45
Media at one

"In terms of my Passport, mine says born in Scotland but my nationality is British and always will be."

Confused between countries & towns? Mine says I was born in Motherwell.
305

Mèths,

17/06/2009 17:49:41
Media at one

"Glasgow you say - oh well then you are one of those weegies we speak about in the East.
Not sure I would be happy about being accused of living in a slum of losers."

And as Media at one shows his true colours it's time for the men in flapping coats to cart him off.

You are indeed an idiot.
306

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 17:50:39
#329 Mèths: Awh it's pure bonnie!!

BUT it's whats written beside the Nationality part what really matters.

#333 awantapassport: They possibly thought it would make it a fake. I believe its in English law that anything that says Scottish or Scotland on it has to be screwiest and examined in full. Did they check yer notes at the same time?
307

awantapassport,

sunnysoothcoast 17/06/2009 17:54:56
336 - A wus too wee fur cairyin notes... but I'm sure he would have!! There's morons in every nation.
308

Mèths,

17/06/2009 17:56:24
Pass the port.
309

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 17:56:25
336

I know what you mean there. I have. now and then, been in possession of Scottish 'Notes' and shop-keepers down here will not take them, claiming it's not 'Legal Tender'




310

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 17:56:52
#334 Mèths: He is an ashamed Edinbruger!!!
He would have liked tae have been born a weegie instead.

So he likes to rewrite geography books and tae add some p!sh in to the offering of which is the Scotsman.
311

Mèths,

17/06/2009 17:58:48
Neal whit etc

How far south are you?
312

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 18:03:23
341 Meths - (sorry, no umlaut)

I am here in Sunny Tunbridge Wells, Kent.

Not quite as far South as possible. Another 70 miles would see me dipping my toes :-)
313

Jerry Springer,

17/06/2009 18:24:49
And here is Meths holding his passport.

http://tinyurl.com/lzdtdc
314

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 18:28:26
342 Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

Be careful now, up until now you have been acquitting yourself reasonably well.

The following is an “umlaut” ( ¨ ).

Listen, read and learn.

315

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 18:32:48
344

what is that mark above the E in his name called then?

If we're going to educate me lets do it thoroughly ;-)
316

Jerry Springer,

17/06/2009 18:39:10
#344

The arrogant and pedantic bully boy strikes again.

Just a shame he does not know how to calculate 10% of anything or know how Champions League points add up.
317

Mèths,

17/06/2009 18:39:16
Looks like a grave (pronounced grav)

Rhymes with chav.
318

Jerry Springer,

17/06/2009 18:40:27
#345 Neal

It's an accent grave.

Bully boy could not tell you as he does not know.

All he can do is smugly point out errors.
319

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 18:47:15
348
Rufus
What about Winston's then? Diddies eh?
320

Mèths,

17/06/2009 18:48:10
Jèrry Sprìngèr

Well done, but a tad late.
321

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 18:54:55
I think Media's only knowledge of Scotland comes from the Sunday Post and comedy shows from the 1970's. He's never been here,has he.

Tin Man are you being purposefully obtuse or does it come naturally ?
322

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 17/06/2009 18:59:11
Our unionist friends have been caught in a fork move, either they have a referendum or they refuse and vote down the bill.

Either way it's handing another tactical WMD to the SNP to use on them.
323

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 17/06/2009 19:00:45
348 Hi Rufus what's with the new moniker?
324

dunedin bully wee 1877,

17/06/2009 19:09:10
346 Jerry Springer

Excellent, Rufus has rejoined the debate.

This is the individual who believes that the UK revenues from the North Sea amount to only £2 billion per annum (2008), and is unable to realise that 9.5% is actually less than 10%.
He also is unable to understand why the terms “By-election” and “Bye-election” are equally acceptable in the language of his/her choice.

How is the plasma car getting on?
325

Media at One,

17/06/2009 19:16:01
It does amaze me how so many people on these threads pretend that Scotland is free from East/West coast hate, religious bigotry and anti English sentiment.
I dont understand why so many people try and deny the obvious.
It also amazes me how it appears to have become wrong for a Scot to be proud of being British. Such intimidation is normal when Nationalists begin to make headway, but it does not mean we need to sit back and take it.
I am Scottish by birth, but I am British in terms of my nationality and so is every other Scot in the world. I will hang onto my British status thank you!
326

Mèths,

17/06/2009 19:20:02
355

"It does amaze me how so many people on these threads pretend that Scotland is free from East/West coast hate"

You started the guff Meja!

327

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 19:25:03
Academic Interest Only!

With regards to a Referendum:

Do you think it should be;

A. Scottish Only?

B. UK wide?

C. Separate North and South of the Border accumulating the results after?

In the event of Independence being mooted in said Referendum, if westminster then Ignored the Will of the Referendees what Actions could be taken to redress that?
328

Jerry Springer,

17/06/2009 19:27:50
Hi Conan, yes unbelievable. For such a small amount as well. Does not surprise me though. They pair of them have previous.
329

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 19:30:23
#351 Observer

I am a great nature lover.

The UK is very hilarious entity, by it's nature, furthermore, I am sure we are aware how funny Westminster is. A Scottish State is about as funny as Finland. Scottish Nationalists are about as amusing as Death, which is an 'eternal' font of jokes.

However, pondering the tax evasion possibilities offered by living in a Scottish State, and holding UK citizenship, I may vote 'yes' - Edinburghers are pretty dour, anyway, so if they got even more taciturn, it may be amusing.
330

Jerry Springer,

17/06/2009 19:31:33
Ha Ha Bully Boy. You should change your name to Billy Liar.

It is you that cant calculate 10% regardless of your pathetic protestations.

I guess you must be 'hurt to the quick' as you would say.

He He He He.
331

Jerry Springer,

17/06/2009 19:34:32
Hi Tormod, a slight (ahem) administration problem.
332

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 19:34:43
#356 Meths

Viz a viz, the tax evasion possibilities offered by living in a Spanish State, and holding UK citizenship.
333

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 19:34:51
357 Taking you at face value - (and because this really annoys Smee) when we talk about independence what we mean is dissolving the Acts of Union of 1707. That means that the proposed referendum will be held in Scotland. All we need to do is to establish/demonstrate by way of a follow on plebisicite (be that a GE, a special election, whatever) that the Scottish people want to dissolve the Union and negotitations can be started. We don't need Westminster's permission - they are not sovereign in Scotland the people are (this has been tested in the court of session) that was confirmed in the (third) Claim of Right (signed by Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling incidentally) which is what we will found any negotiations on (this has alrwady been drafted by the late Professor Neil MacCormick).

So I am afraid you don't really get any say in the matter it is Scottish business.

You may of course wish to propose that England dissolves the Union too.
334

Media at One,

17/06/2009 19:36:38
Meths: I think you will find the guff began when the National Party was formed - and again when Flower of Scotland became the adopted national anthem.
There is division a plenty in Scotland!
335

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 19:37:53
359 I think I prefer you obtuse to obscurant.
336

Eve,

Scotland 17/06/2009 19:39:22
#355 Media at One: Yer wan of the few folk that dinna ken banter, aren't ye!

Us Scots are pure famous for it! Never seen any Scottish comedies like Chewing the Fat?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/%20banter


"I am Scottish by birth, but I am British in terms of my nationality and so is every other Scot in the world. I will hang onto my British status thank you!"

Again no one is really bothered by how you choice to lable yer self. Most of us Scot Nats belive that ye are the lables that ye choice to idetify yer self with.

So why do ye try to impose a nationailty on us, that we'd rather no have?

Nationaitly is the way ye feel NOT the way some bam in Westminsters whitehall lables ye on a passport.
337

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 19:41:06
364 why don't you come and visit us instead of making your mind up about us via Billy Connolly in the telly.

BTW Rebus is not a real policeman, neither was Taggart.
338

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 19:43:53
#365 Observer

Despite having the same colours as the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the SNP nationalist movement is deviod of humour, and without humour, you can't take them seriously.
339

pwd,

Borders 17/06/2009 19:45:28
# 355

Well said!
340

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 19:46:00
#355

I am afraid that the term British is an invented term, coming from the phrase Great Britain and was bandied about in the Days of Empire in order to avoid the separate nations in this Land of ours calling themselves such. Scottish, Welsh, Irish were all subsumed into being 'British' and the only other race 'allowed' was, of course, English.

You could, I suppose, refer it to mean the Original Inhabitants but they were termed Britons, having originated themselves from Bretonny.

These peoples, once the Romans came in, either became the occupied territories (sic) and so the blood-line was bred-out over time or they retreated further North where, I believe, they were picked off by the Picts (ouch - sorry) or they moved West and became the Cornish and the Welsh - of which the welsh have the purest Blood-line and can rightly call themselves Britons.

The British Race does NOT exist per se
341

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 19:47:55
364
Were you the Media 1 who lived part of the year in Stockbridge and the rest in SA?
342

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 19:49:34
368 I have been forced to draw the conclusion that you know next to nothing about the SNP. You appear to be attacking a charicature as opposed to the real thing, and the real people.

Your bizarre belief that the Scots are unable to govern themselves is quite sad. It is not the SNP that I support per se, it is self determination and the principle of subsidiarity. I leave the jokes to comedians.
343

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 19:49:58
#370 Neal!

Another one with no sense of humour. Feal Fionhgh Ghrabughb invented the term 'Pict' in 012 - get with it!
344

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 19:51:35
363

Ah, thanks. We don't get taught this subject down here.

But why do we not get a say in the same way? Surely the Act of Union is a 2-way street? What if the majority of the English do not wish the Union disolved?
345

Richard,

West Llothian 17/06/2009 19:53:04
Seeing as the Unionist cabal are determined to thwart the Scottish Government and the Scotish people of their democratic right to a referendum over Scotland's political future, namely independence, then the Unionists will pay dearly and this is how..

We don't need a referendum all we need to is win a majority of M.P's at the next Westminster general election and Scotland has it's mandate and can declare Independence.
346

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 19:54:22
We all know that the term British really means English and we all know that the Scottish unionists know this and are content with the label :-).
347

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 19:54:36
#372 Observer

The Scottish people, and the Picts, are, and were, both completely capable of governing themselves in a uniquely Scottish (and Pictish) way. Our determination is proved irrefutably by our outstanding success in the 'holding a grudge' competition.
348

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 19:55:46
373

Oh, very well.

The Aborigines of Scotland, ('Alba' the Romans called it I think?), did patently exist at the time and so I think my point stands.

And that was nit-picking to the nth degree if I may make so bold . . . ;-)
349

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 19:56:22
"We all know that the term British really means English and we all know that the Scottish unionists know this and are content with the label :-)"

An example of the humour of the SNP nationalist movement...
350

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 19:57:16
372 ''But why do we not get a say in the same way? Surely the Act of Union is a 2-way street? What if the majority of the English do not wish the Union disolved?''

Basically because the union of parliaments did not dissolve the pre-existing Scottish Parliament ( it suspended it) or the constitutional position as it rested at that time. The people of Scotland are sovereign - not Parliament, so we have no necessity to ask you.

If ''you'' (theoretically I don't mean the actual you) don't want the Act of Union dissolved I suppose ''you'' have the option of invading us, but that was only occasionally successful in the past so I don't recommend it.
351

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 19:58:30
377 You really need to see a doctor I believe low self esteem is treatable.
352

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 20:01:42
379 Tin Man*

Sort of but let's face it...English football fans fly it...little Englanders use it...the BNP (in the name of England really) uses it...chavs use it for Engerlund' and noone abroad looks at the Union Jack flying above an Embassy and says anything other than 'that is the English Embassy'.

Just facts.
353

Nevsky;,

Moscow 17/06/2009 20:04:34
379 Tin Man*

As a point i have never ever in my life heard the term British mistakenly used for Scottish...have you?

On the other hand i have heard it used exclusively in the name of England and i am betting you have too.

354

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:05:49
#381 Observer

Am I to take that as another example of the humour of the SNP nationalist movement...

Look, Observer, people in Wick are perfectly capable of governing themselves. The whole 'incapable of governing themselves' argument is a figment of your imagination. Only people with serfdom oppression syndrome think they are somehow unable to run their own affairs.
355

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 20:07:23
384 My humour is rather dry. So, lets see - your position is then that the Scots could govern themselves but shouldn't ?
356

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:11:03
#385 Observer

The Scots should, and actually do govern themselves, along with N Ireland, Wales, and England, as part of the European Union. Why shouldn't they?
357

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 20:15:01
380

Oh. Did not know, was not taught that it was a Union of Parliaments. Impression at school was always given to be, (with what little we were taught), that Scotland was ours by 'Right of Conquest'.

Why have we not been taught this in England? Any English History Teachers here can answer that please?

Would there not have been a 'statute of limitations' with regard to Time on the suspension of the scottish parliament at that time?

Also, one presumes, upon Seccession the size of Our Parliament should, theoretically, shrink?
358

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:15:26
#385 Observer

We do, after all, all live on the same little island. (Granted, the N Irish live on the same little island as Eire, but they have their nice little ethno-religious issues).
359

Richard,

West Llothian 17/06/2009 20:15:34
The Tin Man

"The Scots should, and actually do govern themselves, along with N Ireland, Wales, and England, as part of the European Union. Why shouldn't they"?

Gibberish.
360

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 20:17:10
386 No we don't. We have very little say in UK issues such as defence and foreign policy. Which are a tad important wouldn't you say in terms of issues like Iraq and Trident. We are now also about to enter into a period of Tory Government. Their fiscal policies may suit the SE but are unlikely to suit us (t'was ever thus) there is inevitably going to be major conflict between the SNP Govt here and the Tory Govt there. That's why it's time to shake hands and move on, politics has reached a divergence and the union is no longer fit for purpose.

However, given that we will both still be members of the EU there is still room for co-operation on issues of mutual concern and agreement.
361

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 20:21:26
387 We will no longer send MP's to Westminster. But you can keep Gordon Brown if you like, and Darling, we won't have any use for them :)

There was no statute of limitations on the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Parliament at Holyrood when opened was ''reconvened'' - but with only partial powers. All we want to do is take back all of them by dissolving the union.
362

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:22:12
#390 Observer

I am sure you will find it hilarious, and I hope you do, but I am going to vote for the Conservatives.

Or do you think you think I should vote for some other party, because that's 'what Scots do'?
363

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 20:25:13
392 do you think I am thick ?
364

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:29:10
#393 Observer

I have voted for the SNP at times. Apart from the separatism bit, there is little to differentiate pro-business, smaller state sector ideologies, and the Tories are more fun. Lower business rates, less corporation tax, smaller state sector - same-same. I am sure you don't have a problem with that.
365

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 20:30:25
387
Nice name for an Englishman;¬)
English history is taught as a progression of victories, after the regrettable but necessary episode of 1066.
Any defeats are are sidelined i.e. the French AND Scots defeating English armies in the Hundred Years War is ignored, but burning Joan D'Arc gets a mention.
Can you name half a dozen English defeats in battle?
366

European Scot,

17/06/2009 20:31:51
392 The Tin Man

" I am sure you will find it hilarious, and I hope you do, but I am going to vote for the Conservatives."

So you are a conservationist at heart, trying to protect an endangered species !
367

Observer,,

Glasgow 17/06/2009 20:32:58
394 You didn't answer my question.

Anyway - as I said you appear to know very little about the SNP they are not smaller state although they are pro business.

Personally I think that's unworkable I agree with Roseanna Cuningham on that, but as I have said they are a means to an end so what the hell.

Tories fun ? Oh yeah they're a laugh a minute. Can't wait.

368

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:34:56
#396 Euro

I am all in favour of conservation!

Help the economy by collecting together the small pieces of soap that you would otherwise flush, and squeeze them together to make a usable piece of soap, suitable for lathering.
369

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:42:14
#397 Observer

Well, they may be secretly pro business, pro big state sector, and pro big debt, but I doubt it. But as you say, that kind of thing is not what they are all about, until that's what they are all about.

370

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

17/06/2009 20:45:47
395 Conan the Librarian™,

The Hundred Years War, is that the one where "we" had all those great victories at Crecy, Poitiers, Oreleans and Agingcourt...are you trying to tell us that the Froggies won?

Heretic!

371

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 20:46:44
391 Missus O

No, no . . . no. You can have Broon and his Darling back ASAP, no worries, no charge!

The Media and the Government here made it sound at the time that we were doing you a huge service by 'allowing' you partial powers. Bar-Studs!!

395 Conan

Thanks ;-) Knew when I joined that I was gonna stir it up a bit - always have had the knack of asking wrong questions at the right time hehehe.

And NO, cannot think of any English Defeats being taught me at school. Even Joan D'Arc is portrayed as us putting down a 'Revolutionary'

372

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:49:43
402
373

The Tin Man,

17/06/2009 20:50:16
Damn!
374

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 20:55:08
402
Bonsoir Mon Colonel. Vive L'Anyonebutenglandia!
375

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 20:56:11
177
The Busman

[1] In 1707, Scotland was broke.

So what? Are you trying to say that the right to self-determination is dependent on ability to pay?

"...my thesis is that support for independence in the Edinburgh is a lot weaker than elsewhere in Scotland..."

What's your point?

"[3] My thesis - which I have put up here for debate - is that support for the SNP should *not* be taken as support for an independent Scotland."

I'm sure the voters in Scotland are grateful for your efforts to clarify what they actually mean when they vote for what they vote for. It may well be that some of those voters don't see you as an irrogant prack.

"And finally, what would the SNP do if it had a referendum on independence and lost?"

The really sad thing is that you imagine this to be a telling point. I want to ask you if you abandon firmly held principles just because they are not popular. But I don't think you would even understand the question.

376

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

17/06/2009 21:00:28
#406 Conan the Librarian™,

Sacre Bleu Conan, I just Googled it...seems I was wrong.

It turns out that the Scots and The French were on the same side and although the English gave up the ghost after a string of defeats at places nobody has ever heard of...It took a further 250years before King of England stopped calling himself the King of France.

377

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 21:02:03
409
I hoped you voted for Niko, the puir wee soul.
378

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

17/06/2009 21:03:29
#409 Berero

Where is the "Ford Transit-Tory" blog?
379

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 21:07:58
410
Col. The French called the Scots(paraphrase)"Sheep shearing wine-sacks"...
...until they won the first victory over the English.
380

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 21:08:50
408
Berero, looking to the night sky for inspiration

"You see the problem with this forum..."

This is not forum. The format is not designed to facilitate discussion. It is intended only for comments.

www.electrichermit.com
381

Phil C,

17/06/2009 21:12:44
#259 Meeja 1 - Quite soon I'll be against the likes of you being issued a Scottish passport on the grounds of your being an anti-Scottish subversive revolutionary. Deportation I say.

...Ooops I forgot, you're already a greedy, self-deported self-seeker!
382

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:13:33
362

I pay my UK taxes.
383

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 21:14:15
#408

Having been in and out of this Forum over the last 18 months it is obvious that no compromise is possible.

There are the SNP/ Independence supporters who WILL win through in time, of that there is no doubt in my mind. (Thanks to Observers' fast education track on Scottish Affairs. X)

And then there are the Labour/Conservative Unionist supporters who, I must admit, leave me wondering about their motives.

I fail to understand their abhorrence of Independence. Is it that they have no faith in the ability of their own people to run their own country?

Is it that they are staunch Monarchists?

Do they believe that a Labour Party that No Longer represents the working man will somehow save them? And from what?

Do tell, everybody, do tell . . .
384

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:14:52
Media

"There is division a plenty in Scotland!"

Yep. Prods v Tims
Black v White
East v West
Us v You!
385

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:19:44
pwd
# 355

"Well said!"

You're easily pleased!
386

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:23:26
Neal etc

"I am here in Sunny Tunbridge Wells, Kent."

Aaargh! 18 miles from my brother (Orpington). Maybe see you for a pint in September.
387

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 21:25:42
#422 Berero

But WHY do they not want Independence? It makes no sense. Surely all 'men' want to be free to run their own affairs?
388

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 21:28:59
#425

Yeah, that'd be Cool. ;-)

Mine's a G&T

I am English after all . . .
389

Phil C,

17/06/2009 21:29:39
Meths, your brother should go to the Save The Children Shop in Orpington. Celebrity volunteers (what's left of them) will gladly assist him into his trendy new gear.

Some ghastly woman is trying to turn it into a nice quirky shop for those with loadsa instead of a recycling centre for those without dosh. I know coz I seen it on tv! That's Labour for you!
390

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:29:42
Isn't it Royal Tunbridge Wells?
391

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:30:19
Electric Hermit

You take this seriously yes?
392

Sumlogic,

WAKE UP 17/06/2009 21:31:14
If it was not for Scotland and its oil, resources, revenue etc the UK would be in an even bigger hole than it already finds itself in and would most likely fall out of the ERM and become such a small player on the world stage (reality) it would be too skint to play with its war toys in the sand of other folks sovereign nations!

The war mongering and power mad of old London Town cant stand the idea of that!

Yes, No matter what the lies say, Scotland can stand on its own, can afford to, has the resources to and bankrolls not only its own costs but also some of the rest of the UK.

Well we the Scots people have been more than generous to the rest of the UK since 1974, time to cut the moorings and set sail for a better future, Independence and a Scotland for all Scots!
393

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:31:58
Neal whit etc etc

I'll give you an email address nearer the time

(failing that - methalions@hotmail.com)
394

Mèths,

17/06/2009 21:32:39
Offski. Mañana.
395

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 21:37:31
429
Hola Mèths, the wife is watching a programme about a half built retirement estate in Spain.Every time it rains raw sewage floods the street.
This Irish fella brushes it away fom his door.
Heh, just heard he's on his "t u r d" brush.(censorbot kicking in there)
396

krusty the klown,

17/06/2009 21:38:14
mmm 433 comments? Jeez, you'd think the independence discussion was as important as UK's got talent
397

Phil C,

17/06/2009 21:38:40
#426 Daft name Neal

I don't think they're real 'men'(or wo'men'), but limp 'men'(or wo'men'). Not happy 'men'(or wo'men') you understand, just limp.
398

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 21:40:09
It was aye Royal once but apparently there is a 'statute of limitations' on that.

If a Royal charter is granted and no other Royal visits that place within x time period (unknown to me at this juncture) then the charter is void and cannot be used in conjunction with said place.

I think it came as a bit of a surprise to the Borough Council (Con) who are, to be fair, quite probably 'on the take' hem hem!
399

Electric Hermit,

17/06/2009 21:41:20
421
Berero, looking to the night sky for inspiration

"Indeed the format is only for comments where yours you can have a discussion plus open up a new topic. Very much like my own Football website and the Spartans Forums. Very impressed BTW.."

Thank you. Have to say that, being accustomed to real discussion forums, I find this format very clumsy. I can't help thinking many here would be more comfortable with a real message board. That is why I decided to open the EH site again.

www.electrichermit.com

400

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 21:43:55
#436 Phil C

Agreed. It's a daftie name but aye canny, an' describes me tae a T. Cos ah've allus been an awkward beggar!!

X
401

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

17/06/2009 21:47:15
Anyway, I'm off to watch a bit of South Park, the best cartoon around. See you all in the Ether tomorrow

Ciao X
402

krusty the klown,

17/06/2009 21:48:16
#439 tried this with online translators to no avail - could we have that in English please?
403

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

17/06/2009 21:58:46
422 Berero, "Because when do you ever see a onion vs an onion, ?"

Good point, although you get the odd dispariging remark about Socialism and some Maggie Thatcher is the spawn of the devil stuff...They never ever snarl and snap at each other.

Where as in the real world, people define their politics by the Party they support on here they are first last and all points in between Unionists...outside of the braindead who overdose on Rangers fanzines, Ludge and UVF propaganda, NOBODY in the real world defines themself in that manner.
404

Phil C,

17/06/2009 22:02:36
#441 Not too tricky

I agree it's a daft name, but it can't be seen by the eye. Ann's getting me and some scribes a cup of tea. Because I'm always thirsty and a terribly awkward beggar.

OK?
405

Conan the Librarian™,

17/06/2009 22:09:16
443
Lol. All your base belong to us.
406

Phil C,

17/06/2009 22:12:40
#444 Boom Booom!
407

Jerry Springer,

17/06/2009 22:22:17
Everybody knows that Scotland would be £20 billion in the red even if it had retained all its oil money.