Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


First Scotsman Debate sees sparks fly on independence

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: 29 May 2008
NICOLA Sturgeon, the deputy First Minister, last night insisted the SNP had not "chickened out" of holding an immediate referendum on independence when recently challenged by Wendy Alexander.
She insisted the party would win a vote in the "once in a generation" poll, if it were put to the Scottish people today.

However, she said Nationalists would prefer to build a solid record in government before holding a vote.

Ms Sturgeon was part of a panel discussing independence in the first of a series of Scotsman Debates to held across the country in the coming weeks.

She was joined by Professor Tom Devine, the historian; Malcolm Chisholm, Labour's constitutional spokesman at Holyrood; Murdo Fraser, the Scottish Tories' deputy leader; Patrick Harvie, the Green MSP; Margo MacDonald, the independent MSP; and Nicol Stephen, the Scottish Liberal Democrats' leader.

The debate, held at Edinburgh University's George Square lecture theatre, was chaired by Michael Crow, STV's political correspondent and presenter of Politics Now.

During the discussion, panel members were asked by an audience member if they thought a referendum would be won if it were held now. "My simple question is why do we delay? Why do we wait two years to come to a decision?" he asked.

Asked by Mr Crow if she had "chickened out" of a quick referendum when Ms Alexander challenged the SNP to "bring it on," Ms Sturgeon retorted: "If we changed our position every time Wendy Alexander changed hers, we would all be in a mess." She insisted voters needed time to see how well the SNP operated in government before they decided on independence.

But she added: "We could win a referendum now."

Ms Sturgeon's views were dismissed by Mr Chisholm who insisted the issue of independence stood alone and "does not depend on the popularity of a particular party".

Later, Ms Sturgeon was asked to comment on the view expressed by Alex Salmond, the First Minister, that a referendum would be "a once in a generation" question.

Mr Crow asked if failure to win a referendum on independence would mean the SNP should drop it from their manifesto.

She replied: "I don't think we would lose the referendum. The First Minister was expressing a personal view. My personal view is a referendum is a once-in-a-generation event."

Mr Stephen reiterated his view that there should not be a referendum unless there was a majority in Holyrood for independence.

A full account of the debate will be published in tomorrow's Scotsman.

WHAT NEXT?

ON Monday, at Aberdeen's Town House, a panel including Martin Ford, who originally rejected the controversial Trump golf resort plan with a casting vote, will discuss: Does the Trump saga show Scotland has failed to balance its economic and environmental interests?

E-mail scotsmandebates@scotsman.com or write to David Lee, ScotsmanDebates, The Scotsman, 108 Holyrood Road, Edinburgh, EH8 8AS for tickets. Please state how many you want (maximum two per applicant) and for which debate(s).

The full article contains 504 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

,

29/05/2008 00:18:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Guga II,

Rockall 29/05/2008 00:34:57
The Mouth of the South should tell her masters in Westminster that we want a general election, and that they should "bring it on". After all, it's not as if Maggie Broon has got any form of endorsement from the electorate for either his government or himself.

She might also tell her masters in Westminster to "bring it on" as regards a referendum on the latest EU treaty he has foisted on the public.

Does The Mouth of the South know the meaning of the word hypocrisy? She should, as the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party practice it all the time.

3

AJ Fife,

29/05/2008 00:36:46
What on earth was wrong with #1 Mr Scotsman???????

How about e-mailing me an explanation!
4

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 00:37:21
Why was comment 1 removed?

Scotsman censorbot check;

Onionist, Sh!tting, themselves.
5

AJ Fife,

29/05/2008 00:39:18
#4,

Something stinks here! It must've been the "Onionist" jibe! :)
6

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 00:40:40
3
Indeed AJ

Perhaps the Scotsman IT team should hold out for walnuts?
7

,

29/05/2008 00:48:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/05/2008 00:49:09
If NuLabour is so desparate for a Referendum, they will propose one, with a question framed within the Devolution settlement, before the SP.

If they are only "grandstanding", they won't.

Who's taking bets?

Does NuLabour really think that the Scottish Electorate is stupid?
9

Hmm ...,

29/05/2008 00:50:13
... excellent debate on a format similar to TV's Question Time, very ably chaired by Michael Crow who gave us very entertaining but tongue in cheek introductions of the participants. The stars were undoubtedly Prof. Tom Devine, who successfully plugged his latest book "Scotland and the Union", and Margo MacDonald who presented her argument in her inimitable manner but both were upstaged by a member of the audience who asked that the Scotsman's editorial policy should reflect the composition of the panel in the debate. This suggestion was particularly well received by the audience!

Nicola Sturgeon represented the SNP's views very ably - but then we expect no less of her, so perhaps she doesn't get well-deserved credit. Poor Malcolm Chisolm had a sorry row to plough, bound as he was by Labour's recent history and its present predicament and Nicol Stephen and Murdo Fraser made up numbers.

If the subsequent debates maintain this standard, The Scotsman has served Scotland very well indeed!
10

Jimmy the Pie,

29/05/2008 00:51:38
Ask Comrade Broon about chickens.

Remember last October?

The election that never was!

Bring it on Comrade!!
11

Hmm ...,

29/05/2008 00:54:51
... oh, and Patrick Harvie came across better than I expected, except when he couldn't resist saying that he wanted independence from oil.

So do we all, Patrick - but only when we have a better alternative!

And preferably found in unlimited amounts only in Scotland!
12

truthsleuth,

29/05/2008 00:57:28
#2 Guga II

As I see it the SNP are always shouting their mouths off about Independance but when given the chance they crawl back down their holes and raise the saltire with a yellow cross.

They do not have the courage of their own convictions and the canny Scots will recognise them for what they are Afeart.
13

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 00:58:43
Hmm and Jimmy the Pie; I am coming to the conclusion that "Bury Free Press" now rules.
14

Nikostratos,

29/05/2008 01:01:40
cluck..cluck..cluck...cluck snp chick chick chicken........come then go for it yellow the lot of ya especially Guga..
15

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 01:04:22
14
Jeez Niko, does your carer ken you are up this late?
16

Scottish Politics,

29/05/2008 01:04:50
What kind of a headline is "SNP 'has not chickened out over vote on independence'"? That is plainly a ridiculous assessment of what was an excellent debate on independence. It seems that the member of the audience was indeed correct to raise the point about the Scotsman editorial policy.

If that was the only message taken from the debate by the so-called journalists at the Scotsman it is no wonder circulation is going through the floor.
17

Jimmy the Pie,

29/05/2008 01:06:51
12 truthsleuth,

Might be an idea to learn how to spell independence, before you start shouting about it!

Buffoon
18

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 01:11:15
17
Seriously Jimmy; google "Bury free Press."
19

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/05/2008 01:16:13
#14, Nikostratus & #12, truthsleuth.

Why doesn't NuLabour bring the Referendum forward.

I know that under SG standing orders they can't on their own but, they could GUARANTEE the SNP a majority for an immediate Referendum.

Is NuLab genuine, or are they just "grandstanding"?

Anyone taking bets?
20

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 29/05/2008 01:18:03
12 Untruthsleuth

Convictions are what most parties print on their manifesto and even a White Paper. Read it and you'll see the SNP have a conviction for a referendum in 2010. Who knows what Wendy's position will be then. Truly a non-conviction politician.

And 14 Niko

Another startlingly knowledgeable and substantive post. Just what we expect from you.
21

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 01:19:21
Good Evening Frank.
Was ciderman annoying you earlier?
22

BrianHill,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 01:24:02
Yes it was a good evening with a predominantly nationalist audience I would say.

One audience member asked if anyone on the panel didn't think Scotland could run its own affairs. Naturally everyone said it could but the Unionists claimed we had to look at the best form of Government for Scotland and that was within the Union.

Oh really??

Tom Devine, Margo and Nicola were the undoubted stars and Michael Crow made an excellent chairman.....apart from not picking me to ask a question of course.....and me wi the good shirt 'n tie oan and au'hing, hair combed, the lot!!



23

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 01:26:10
22
Combed hair...
24

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/05/2008 01:34:20
#21, Conan.

Good evening, Conan.

Just a bit, but I suppose I should make allowance for the scumpy. Prefer the amber nectar, myself.

Anyway, is he still rambling??????????????
25

subrosa,

29/05/2008 01:35:35
# 23

Sounds like his Sunday best Conan :)
26

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/05/2008 01:39:34
Has anyone else noticed?

The Scotsman is getting like the "Herald". Only, on the Scotsman, comments are pay-per-view.

Like, on the Herald boards, this comment has been recorded for posterity.
27

Jimmy the Pie,

29/05/2008 01:39:50
From today's Guardian.

Crisis could bankrupt Labour leaders

Party officials could become liable for millions of pounds worth of debt unless new donors can be found

Just watch the rats flee the stricken ship!!

28

Jimmy the Pie,

29/05/2008 01:41:54
Here's the link to the above story

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/may/29/labour
29

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 01:45:38
24
Frank I tend to ignore his spoutings:-)
But sometimes you JUST have to respond.

25
subrosa
LOL
30

Nikostratos,

29/05/2008 01:53:42
#19 frankie if he aint in bed

£100 on the nose any takers............

"She (nicky)insisted the party would win a vote in the "once in a generation" poll, if it were put to the Scottish people today"

what dont have a referendum because we will win it.......Is she having a laugh
31

frank mcbride,

29/05/2008 02:14:10
#30, Nikita.

I'll take that bet. NuLab will never, NEVER, guarantee the SNP a majority on a Referendum Bill.

You don't seem to be able to take on board, Niko, that the SNP tries to fulfil its Manifesto commitment, even in minority.
2010 is the Manifesto date for a Referendum, but if NuLab want to bring this forward, I'm sure the SG would be happy to assist.

Is NuLab grandstanding? Yes or YES.

Anyway Niko, your bet is accepted. I'll meet you in (The Red Lion) The Settle Inn in Stirling; let's say 3/9/2008 - 3mths. is long enough for NuLab to get its act together. Don't you agree?
32

,

29/05/2008 04:22:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
33

An Beal Bacht,

29/05/2008 04:49:42
Hmm at 9 - good post

Conan at 18 - googled - scary!!!

Brian at 22 - ye mean ye goat dressed up fur nuthin?

Frank at 26 - I've noticed.

Jimmy at 28 - good link - maybe he was up here looking for donations?

Cybernats everywhere - it's startin!

34

donald,

glasgow 29/05/2008 06:03:38
Labour could hold a referendum from the English Parliament - if it really, really wants.
35

Royster,

29/05/2008 06:07:16
#34. What English parliament?
36

Letters From Muscat,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 06:34:23
Sorry I missed the fun...things are definitely changing here ( Bob Dylan) !!!Did they mention council tax at all? Did anyone discuss the complexities of local income tax? Top businessmen deserting the place? or are they all going to stay and enjoy the benefits of all this expensive oil? keep me posted...Will different tribes be at each other's throats? Interesting times !
37

Lance Boyle,

Linlithgow 29/05/2008 06:42:38
I seem to remember that, not so long ago, all of you nationalists were praising The Herald. How times change.
38

Lance Boyle,

Linlithgow 29/05/2008 06:44:18
The vast majority of Scots are too canny to vote for independence. They have not been taken in by SNP spin or the SNP supporting media.
39

glassbenmhor,

29/05/2008 06:53:17
Come on you Unionistas,

Tell us all why you think, a member of the public in Scotland should put up with oil refined from Scottish waters being offered to him with the highest prices in the western world by the Westminster Government,

go on enlighten us?
40

glassbenmhor,

29/05/2008 06:56:06
300 years of----aye----- history
41

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 07:25:50
#38

“Lance Boil”?

“canny Scots”?

“SNP supporting media”?


At least you are making an attempt at humour, which at this time of the day is commendable
42

SouthernSkye,

Bonnie Bonn 29/05/2008 07:26:31
#18 Conan
As well as Bury Free Press don't forget the illustrious organ known as the.....
http://www.stornowaygazette.co.uk
43

kimba,

29/05/2008 07:36:56
England will be fine with or without Scotland. Some of us just don't have the heart to sell Scotland out to Brussels. That job falls upon the fakes who used bigotry to gain support.
44

,

29/05/2008 07:54:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
45

morris,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 08:01:54
44
England and Wales and Northern Ireland will be what remains when Scotland leaves .It will be known as whatever it decides to be called.What that will be is a good question!
You will have what is rightfully yours and fare accordingly. No one disputes this.Generally speaking this should be around 90% of everything the UK contained.
Some of us just dont have the heart to sell Scotland out to Brussels?What are you driveling about?

Scotland will remain a member of the EU as will the remainder of the former United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in whatever shape or form it takes.(we are still united as far as 1603 goes with only 1707 changing as I understand this).We will all still be in the EU and no customs barriers were ever envisaged anyway ,much along the lines of Sweden and Norway who continue to enjoy a very open border since Norway became indpependent so we can also do this.
Scotland will be offered terms of membership which she will probably accept,(but I presume this of course),and that remains to be seen.The same of course applies to the other part which includes England of course,but again I expect acceptance to be the majority held view.
Very little will change in fact.
I dont knoiw where you get your information from but I would take it back if I were you!
46

Bigwull,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 08:05:00
We need to get away from Engerlund before they vote Tory, or we'll be decimated again!! Guaranteed
47

Royster,

29/05/2008 08:08:11
#39. Oil revenue is just a small part of the overall economy. In return you get an NHS, armed forces, roads, schools, police force etc etc. Unlike many countires, including a few in Europe, corruption is quite rare. The British state works and has been a model for others. In my view, it's main fault is that people are molly-coddled too much but others think differently. A small state along the lines of Iceland or Ireland cannot compete and has to offer substantial tax reductions (ie less money for the general population) to attract business. Like all businesses, they want a good location with plenty of opportunities which is why people are flocking to China at the moment. They have to be bribed to go to Iceland and Ireland. Only a fool would swap revenue from a single commodity with that from a large, developed and varied economy.
48

Royster,

29/05/2008 08:09:35
#47. Stagecoach and Souter did quite nicely out of the Tories.
49

morris,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 08:11:48
47

Congratulations Bigwull!
You've got it in one.Thats precisely what will happen thanks to the New Labour voting morons.
The big problem most Labour voters have is they need to be run over before they realise a bus is coming.
50

morris,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 08:20:30
49
Whilst that is true, the point is surely that post independence Brian Souter would like everybody else (including you), be free to vote for whoever he likes.Thats democracy.
Independence can only happen if the Scots support it Thats also democracy.

I fail to see what relevance this has to anything to be honest.Brian Souter donated money to the SNP.Thats also his democratic choice to make.


The Labour Party have accepted thousands of donations some of which are dodgy /known to be illegal.
What this has to do with the SNP observing the rules I fail to comprehend.Maybe you object to funding of political parties who disagree with you?

Thats not even sensible never mind democratic!
51

westcider,

Isle of Lewis 29/05/2008 08:32:14
Yes, What we all should make clear to the non thinking around us is exactly what will change and what will remain the same. The stratagem from Wendy is to panic people into a quick vote whereas the government would prefer to show exactly how things would be better for everyone. The argument must be developed past the name calling and on to the great benefits of closer faster more relevant government with an emphasis on Scotlands many assets and how they should be developed for the good of the country. We all have our own part to play in this to move the nation forward.
52

Alan Reid,

NZ 29/05/2008 08:41:15
48 Royster #39. “Oil revenue is just a small part of the overall economy. In return you get an NHS, armed forces, roads, schools, police force etc etc. Unlike many countires, including a few in Europe, corruption is quite rare. The British state works and has been a model for others. In my view, it's main fault is that people are molly-coddled too much but others think differently. A small state along the lines of Iceland or Ireland cannot compete and has to offer substantial tax reductions (ie less money for the general population) to attract business. Like all businesses, they want a good location with plenty of opportunities which is why people are flocking to China at the moment. They have to be bribed to go to Iceland and Ireland. Only a fool would swap revenue from a single commodity with that from a large, developed and varied economy"

Royster:
People are doing deals with China because:
1: cheap labour, the work force as much as maybe 600 million? On what, $3 a day?
2 No Unions,
3: no environmental laws (or very little)
And a few more


“Only a fool would swap revenue from a single commodity with that from a large, developed and varied economy”

Also your right, oil is just a small part of the Scottish economy. We have whisky, water, fishing (whats left of it) textiles (whats left of it) Banking, tourism, and more and we only have 8.6% of the total UK population.

“Unlike many countires, including a few in Europe, corruption is quite rare. The British state works and has been a model”
Your joking right? How did Roysth V Devenport in 91 look to you?
What about the Iraq invasion? Is that not corrupt?

“A small state along the lines of Iceland or Ireland cannot compete and has to offer substantial tax reductions (ie less money for the general population) to attract business”
Point is the Scottish Government is NOT ALLOWED to change it’s corporate tax rate, so on that point we can never compete on a fair level playing field, with the r
53

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 29/05/2008 08:41:54
#51 morris

Brian Soutar is perfectly free to bung the SNP £500,000 and watch the SNP's policy of bus re-regulation magically disappear.
54

Scotsman in Dublin,

29/05/2008 08:43:52
What a ridiculous notion to say that the SNP have 'chickened out' by not holding a referendum when the leader of another party says they should! The SNP stood for election on a promise of a referendum bill for 2011, if they dont bring that bill forward then people can say they have chickened out, not before. When the time comes we will see who chickens out and who does not.
55

Alan Reid,

NZ 29/05/2008 08:44:55
Cont'
Point is the Scottish Government is NOT ALLOWED to change it’s corporate tax rate, so on that point we can never compete on a fair level playing field, with the rest of the UK.

Sorry mate you’ll have to do better than that, to make me vote for staying in this Union.
56

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 08:45:23
Anyone else seen the news about the Labour party's latest financial woes?

Several banks are due to call in loans over the next couple of months and when the party are unable to pay up then Gordy Broon and his executive council will individually all be held responsible and could all be declared bankrupt.
Several key Unions affilliated to the party are reported to be already making moves to distance themselves from any fallout if this should come to pass with senior officials requesting to be granted indemnity.

As MPs are barred from office in the event of being declared bankrupt and Labour would never dare foist another unelected Prime Minister on the country we could be in for a general election sooner than we thought.

Given the stench surrounding previous attempts by Labour to resolve its 'funding crisis' I for one am watching this story for developments, but obviously as you can understand, not in the Scotsman.
57

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 08:48:56
Sorry missed out the link:...

Labour cash crisis could bankrupt party leaders

David Hencke, Westminster correspondent The Guardian, Thursday May 29 2008 Article history

>>Senior officials in the Labour party, including Gordon Brown, could become personally liable for millions of pounds in debt unless new donors can be found within weeks,<<

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/may/29/labour
58

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 29/05/2008 08:53:03
The Scots are not taken in by pro SNP reporting. We are far too clever for that.
59

morris,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 08:55:58
39
Oil would only be part of Scotlands economy also,with whisky fishing and a number of smaller industries all playing their part.Silicon Glen manufactures a fair output for a nation of 5 miilion.We are far from being a single commodity nation in Scotland.
Even if we were a banana republic (literally) provided we had enough bananas we could trade them with other nations .The laws of supply and demand certainly apply ,but as long as you have both,what commodity you are dealing in matters progressively less.
You seem to forget that The Rest Of The former UK has somewhere around 10 times as many mouths to feed,with England being so industrialsed that she cannot feed herself and imports food in bulk.As long as she has enough manufactured goods to pay for it (which she does)then it does not matter(apart from wartime).
Whilst diversification certainly plays a part as in flexible is best,its far more important to have enough in total,as a priority,since a balance of payments cannot exist otherwise presumably?
What you say owes far more to scaremongering than sound economic principle.
60

sonofhamish,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 09:01:20
There are SO many other more important and pressing issues confronting Scotland right now. Why this non-sense on independance even gets an airing is beyond me.

When are the SNP and their ilk going to stop being so small minded and backward looking.
61

Lance Boyle,

Linlithgow 29/05/2008 09:03:23
59

Patrick, I couldn't agree more. We are used to the Tories getting an easy time of it but the press have gone overboard with their pro SNP attitudes.
62

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 09:06:22
59 Patrick O'Reilly
Would you mind providing a link to some, I'm afraid that looking for rocking horse droppings and hens' teeth is easier?
63

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 09:10:45
60 morris
The UK manufacturing industry's balance of payments has made sorry reading for decades now.
The UK economy is now by a huge margin funded by bookies taking bets on commodity prices in the City of London and Docklands.
64

morris,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 09:13:02
57

There have been a number of suggestions over the years that the creation of UNISON (you will know all about Jim Devine of course)was in fact nothing more than dragging Nalgo (fourth largest and non political and believe or not comprising of a predominately TORY supporting membership) into the Labour Party contributing Unions (through back door amlagamation),and Labours Walworth Road offices in London were being sold if it failed to materialise.Nalgo Cohse and Nupe were free to join forces or go their separate ways when it suited their purpose,and the benefit of a larger Union was not confined to its membership!Labour were the winners here and the real reason for this Unity.Tory Nalgo would never have been a Labour Union any other way.

Labours internal finances have been iffy for many years now,and one has to ask where have the millions which the Trade Unions contributed gone? I see precious liitle to suggest its above board!They are permanently in debt and somebody must have their hands in the cookie jar.There is no other explanation. Or is there?Labour spend money certainly,but on what?
65

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 09:28:30
#2 Guga -

"After all, it's not as if Maggie Broon has got any form of endorsement from the electorate for either his government or himself."

You are right about Gordon Brown not having any endorsement from the electorate to be Prime Minister but you must be confused about the labour government having no endorsement - they won the 2005 general election by a majority and therefore clearly have the endorsement of the electorate to form a government.
66

morris,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 09:30:55
64

Indeed the management of the UK economy does not compare well to other European nations.It may be one of the largest,its certainly not well managed.
No argument there Livi.

My point really is that because Scotland is a much smaller nation and economy,it is if anything to her advantage in terms of manageability ,I would have thought,and she is not disadvantaged by having limited resources in terms of diversity ,in the same way as having no resources(in terms of quantity) would do ,(which is what is implied by Royster). We are perfectly sound as you are no doubt only too well aware.
I'm not suggesting that the UK has performed well,far from it.I am like you anxious to leave because I know the strength of Scotland's position is sound, and has been for many years now, even before the oil was discovered.
Maybe its just me but you seem to assume I am supporting or implying things which I have not in fact said, nor do I claim?
67

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 09:31:28
#57 livilion

I notice that the Labour party are exploring the possibility of becoming a 'limited liability company'.
Retrospectively??????????
Surely then when they liquidate, they would have to relaunch under another name.
Or maybe just not bother.
Another reason for Scottish Labour to distance itself from London Labour.
68

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 09:34:57
68 Ananurhing
There's an idea, I take it New Labour is a non-runner so how about the conservative and unionist party, to allow for modern thinking within the socialist movement in London?
69

Doh,

29/05/2008 09:34:57

I went along.
The debate was well natured but some god awful questions.

The old boy at the front going on about Culloden was a time waster and the lady at the end cornered the microphone to point out that no women had asked a question and then went on - not to ask a question.
But I think Tory boy deserves man of the match for sheer blind partisanship. Well done son.

Margo was a first class panderer and wondered why Scotland didnt have steel industry any more - presuming it was the fault of the union no doubt. I thought it was due to world wide oversupply causing the most expensive manufacturers to go out of business.

At the end Tom Devine congratulated on her debating point "och yer too intelligent". All in all another day in fantasy land.
70

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 09:43:39
66 Tellen1
Good point but Tony Blair and now Gordy Broon secured less of the popular vote in 2005 than Alex Salmond's party in the Holyrood elections last year.
71

morris,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 09:44:18
66
I think you are both correct if the truth be of any consequence. Blair and Boron were democratically elected in the sense of they finished ahead under a first past the post system,which usually means more people opposed Blair's election than supported it!The same is true therefore of Broon since he has that same dubious mandate.
If an election were held tomorrow Labour would be annihilated and thats pretty well confirmed by all the measures which are available to us.
In fact if the bye election result were repeated(I'm sure it wont be that bad)Labour would be on the wrong end of a nearing 400 seat majority,and finished as a credible party of opposition.I think myself a majority of between 200 and 300 is possible.
The point is the majority is academic when a party slips out of contention.Labour are certainly deep in it,and I don't see them coming out again.The Trade Unions will all be announcing an increase in contributions to bail the party out(or will they).I suspect they may tell Labour to go play with the traffic on the M25.

72

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/05/2008 09:44:48
If we are honest one could say that the position of all parties is based on tactics with no real principle.

The truth of the matter is that both the SNP and Labour only want a referendum to take place if they have a good chance of winning. Labour wants a referendum sooner because it reckons (and quite rightly in my opinion) that they are more likely to win a referendum held sooner rather than later. The SNP don't want a referendum now as they know they need time to build support for independence.

The longer that the unionist parties put off a referendum the less likely they are to win. Of course this assumes that the SNP continue to govern popularly - we have all seen how quickly things can change. Salmond has a balancing act to play - he has to govern well but at the same time convince the electorate that he could govern even better with independence.
73

Dooogie,

Highland 29/05/2008 09:48:25
After INDEPENDENCE Scotland will still be part of the united kingdom because we will still have the same monarch and we will still be part of the commonwealth and the EU.
What we will be left with will be Lesser Britain and Greater Scotland.
We will no longer be dragged along with the Union Jack booted diplomacy which led us into the bloody mess we now have in Iraq.
Ma Broon has just done a great deal - for the oil companies- and sold out more of Scotlands oil for a pittance and offered them huge incentives for the privilege.
74

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 09:54:22
What I find interesting in the debate is we seem to have reached a stage where a case for the union needs to be made, and no one is making it.
Other than the usual patronising trite guff.
" Stronger together", and " the Scottish people don't want independence".
The only progress made by the pro-unionists is at least they've stopped telling Scotland that independence is unviable.
If that's the best they can offer, then not only is it time, it's also inevitable.
75

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/05/2008 10:02:18
#75 One could argue that the SNP's position is that the case for independence needs to be made too. If did not then you can bet your bottom dolalr they'd be going for a referendum now. It's not the hardline independent voters that need convinced but the vast majority of the electorate who sitting on the fence over the issue.

What the unionist parties are hoping for is that fear and uncertainty will drive many of those undecideds into their camp. That as a strategy may be fine in the short run but won't work in the long term.

The undecided voters need to be convinced by both sides of the debate - until this happens then they will remain undecided.
76

morris,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 10:08:44
73

Whilst the support of any party for a referendum will indeed consider the likely outcome,and no one would dispute that, and yes the SNP should be in a better position after having been in power(or they have screwed up badly and we are well warned is another possibility to be fair),the position of the SNP is consitent in that they have meade clear what they want when and how.
The Unionists tactics are not to measure support for independece but oppose it as long as this is possible.The referendum has value therfore since we KNOW what the true position is (in theory anyway).

The problem is that anything other than a straight choice between Status Quo and Independence involves an unknown called Devolution MkII and we have no idea what that contains. Its a blank cheque and maybe a bouncing one !
More devolution? Different devolution they mean,with a few minor meaningless concessions coupled to the removal of any opposition to Trident Nuclear Generation and Dumping and anything else which Westmonster wishes to imnpose upon us (A Tory government for a start).

At least with the SNP you know what they are intending.Anybody who belives anything that Nicolarse or Ubendy says deserves what they get.
77

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 10:19:13
#76 The Fed

I think the fear and negative campaigning is proving to be counter productive for Labour at least. As it was in Crewe and Nantwich. I also think the number of people who are undecided is diminishing rapidly.
As I've said before, I'm struck by the amount of normally apolitical people I know who are not only now pro-independence, but are voicing derision and distrust for Scottish Labour. Wendy in particular seems to inspire this reaction.
78

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 10:19:32
70 Doh
>>I thought it was due to world wide oversupply causing the most expensive manufacturers to go out of business.<<

Yes that's what we were told when our own government pulled the plug on British Steel the UK's govt owned national steel industry but it turns out the France, Germany, and Italy, to name just three, today have thriving and expanding steel industries supplying among other things steel for domestic and foreign shipbuilding, vehicle manufacture and railway infrastructure.

Our manufacturing went out the window when UKplc went bust during the 70s was baled out by the IMF and we got lumbered with Thatcher's vendetta against the unions from 1979 onwards.
Just when the money from the North Sea Oil really started coming ashore it was used to pay the dole money for 3million workers Thatcher put out of work in order to emasculate the unions.

I might also mention that Spain still has a thriving fishing industry, but then Spain has identified that fishing is a significant industrial sector to her people unlike the attitude in Whitehall.
79

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 10:23:16
#71 - I'm not sure where you got your statistics that labour secured less of the popular vote in 2005 than the SNP in the 2007 scottish election.

In the 2005 general election labour got 35.3% of the vote whereas the SNP only got 31.9% of the vote in the 2007 scottish election.

#72 - yes you are right, if there was an election tomorrow labour would lose badly but the fact remains that they won the 2005 election and therefore have a mandate to form a government till 2010 if they wish.

Regarding the fact that more people voted against labour than for, yes that is correct - but thats the first-past-the-post system for you - more people also voted against the SNP in 2007 (68% of those who voted) but they still got to form a (minority) government, despite the scottish system being a mix of FPTP and proportional representation.
80

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 10:23:52
77 morris
The McCrone made clear the UK govt's attitude to devolution; it is a stalling tactic against Scottish independence until such time as any outstanding resources of use to The Treasury can be milked dry.

Is it only market forces at play that less than a year after Broon became PM he's up here turning up the wick on North Sea Oil production?
81

,

29/05/2008 10:33:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
82

,

29/05/2008 10:40:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
83

Robert Mason,

Larkhall 29/05/2008 10:40:16
82

Skratch, while I agree that the 2010 referendum will deliver a "no" vote, I am sure that the SNP will win more Holyrood seats in 2011. Therein lies the dilemma for the party: will it then have to move to the left?
84

Mack1,

Carlisle 29/05/2008 10:47:05
I can't see the SNP making its mind up on a referendum any time soon. After that it will be academic as far as us south of the Border are concerned: by then we will have kicked out Labour and the Tories will bring in an English Parliament to resolve the constitutional anomalies resulting from Devolution. That will be the the final nail in the coffin as far as the Union is concerned.
85

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 29/05/2008 10:47:55
84

Robert, as things stand, it couldn't move much further to the right, could it?
86

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 29/05/2008 10:48:52
85

Mack1, the drink must be strong in Carlisle.
87

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 10:51:06
#82 Skratch me left bollack

Correct me if I'm wrong but at the Holyrood elections in May last year the case for independence was put on the back burner by the SNP, and rarely if ever mentioned by them, to avoid clouding the issues as constitutionaly there was no possibility of independence even if 100% of those eligible cast their ballot for the SNP.

Considering that until the SNP took power last year their access to media coverage was severely curtailed and downright lies were being left unchallenged (McCrone etc).
It is hardly surprising and entirely understandable that the SNP want time to redress some of the longstanding untruths and propaganda the Scottish electorate have been subject to for many decades but more especially in the era of the devolution debates, too wee, too poor, too thick etc.

A referendum if proposed today would not be enacted until 2009 by which time the case for and against persevering with the Union would be made. We're talking of a difference of twelve months at most, personally I reckon I've waited this long, another year is only going to make the outcome more clearcut which I think is what we all need.
88

kimba,

29/05/2008 10:52:32
46.
89

kimba,

29/05/2008 10:53:17
46.The SNP seek to get sovereignty from Westminster and give it straight to their masters in the EU instead. They are euro-nationalists who are on the side of europe and not Scotland.
90

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 29/05/2008 10:55:04
88

livilion, the SNP may have had a restricted press in the past but the newspapers are their pals now. But this will change.
91

frank mcbride,

lusitania 29/05/2008 10:55:47
"Scotland free, or a desert.", the rallying cry of the 1820 Weavers' Rebellion.

Although coined almost 200yrs ago, it still has resonance.

After 40yrs of Wilson/Callaghan incompetence, Thatcher/Major slash & burn and Brown/Blair lies, theft and credit card economics, where are we headed?

The Union and its politicians have failed.

For the sake of our children, and our children's children, we must move to Independence.
92

ruthie,

alba 29/05/2008 10:59:16
The only "chickening out" is being done by Mr North Britain who bottled on an election last year. He and his vindictive, sleazy party are a disgrace to socialism.
93

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 10:59:31
91 W U Merchant
I think there's significant difference between the press reporting Labour making a right erse of themselves and being pro SNP, but you're right, when the contracts for government asdvertising contracts are being handed out then attitudes in editor's offices may well be reconsidered.
94

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/05/2008 11:01:55
#92 Just because a country becomes independent does not necessarily mean that its politicians are any better than before. All you may end up doing is swapping one bunch of numpties for another.
95

TommyKaye,

UK 29/05/2008 11:04:47
Maurice Fitzpatrick, senior tax manager at Grant Thornton, the accountants is quoted in the FT today:

Since the Budget in March, the Treasury has already taken an estimated £820m more than its forecasts in North Sea oil tax. The £6bn of surplus revenue would easily cover the cost of U-turns on both fuel duty and vehicle excise duty, where ministers are introducing new bands which could cost an extra £200 for drivers of inefficient cars. Deferring the 2p increase in fuel duty by six months would cost £550m. Scrapping the revamped vehicle excise duty altogether would mean the loss of an estimated £465m next year and £735m next year - although ministers may only remove the retrospective element of this tax.

So scrapping the poll tax on wheels and the 2p hike on petrol taxes would cost about 9 weeks extra than forecast windfall taxes due to high oil prices.
96

Alan B,

29/05/2008 11:06:29
#95 The Federalist

Atleast u can kick the numpties out.

One big problem with the union is scotland got the tories when the country had overwhelmingly rejected them.

Labour had to reform to nu labour and sell out it roots and values simply to be electable in england.

Democractically it is better to have a government for scotland by scotland. Although i do recognise ur type of devolved federalism would address many of the issues. But that is not on the table.

97

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 11:06:45
90 kimba,
So the choice is between Westminster who destroyed our industry and cleared our best people out of Scotland or Brussels who set up the Irish to overtake us in about ten years time?
Tough call, can I have time to think about it?
98

Scotty F,

Scottish Borders 29/05/2008 11:07:28
Having attended last nights event i left feeling very angry with many of the attitudes on display from my fellow countrymen. The arrogance and ignorance on display was disgusting particularly from the nationalist contingent including Nicola Sturgeon!! First of all the ignorance. The whole of the UK should have a say on the future of Great Britain as Scotland is an integral part which financially,economically and militarily cuts well above our 5 million people it is not just the Scots who are unhappy with the Union.Furthermore the Nationalists and the SNP are ignorant of the fact that if an Independant Scotland were to attempt to join the EU how on earth would we be allowed in automatically??? any members would have the right to veto, iam sure France (over Corsica), Spain (which doesnt recognise Kosovo) Germany and Belgium would be very apprehensive and have something to say and stall our efforts.So you nationlists stop being so blooming ignorant and wake up to reality!International law is never straight forward!!Moreover to my second point the Arrogance. "A mans a man for aw that" yes a Scottish quote yet alot of people in the audience and in Scotland seem to think we are better than the rest of the UK. That the world looks up to us that we are morally better than our cousins from the rest of these Isles!! An SNP spokesperson is on record saying after Eurovision that the UK is not liked and that Scotland is liked much more than the UK!!! Look up arrogance in the dictionary and you will see that this comment should be a prime example of Arrogance. The fact that the Nationalist think we are better than the rest of the UK beggars belief and runs contrary to the attitudes that our much loved tartan army bleet about all over the world, and this new found attitude makes me ashamed to be Scottish!!!

Now a quick note to you Irish, there are some Scots who out there including me who are proud to be both Scottish and British, i personally believe in a federal Britain with
99

Saruman,

29/05/2008 11:09:33
Mr Crow asked if failure to win a referendum on independence would mean the SNP should drop it from their manifesto.

She replied: "I don't think we would lose the referendum. The First Minister was expressing a personal view. My personal view is a referendum is a once-in-a-generation event."

This is the Nats’ Achilles Heal : what will become of the party if, as all opinion polls to date have suggested, they lose a referendum. Nicola’s lack of any excuse for a meaningful response about says it all To all you Nats out there, I beg to ask for “your thoughts”. I’m waiting…
100

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 11:10:26
95 The Federalist
Or you might be encouraging our best talent to return to benefit their native land like the Irish next door are doing.
Is it only in Britain that Scots are percieved as numpties?
101

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 11:11:15
Livilion - you haven't told me where you got your (incorrect) statistics about the SNP getting more of the popular vote in 2007 than labour did in 2005?

As I pointed out in an earlier post (#80) labour got 35.3% of the vote in 2005 whereas the SNP only got 31.9% of the vote in 2007.
102

Alan B,

29/05/2008 11:14:01
#Scotty F

"The whole of the UK should have a say on the future of Great Britain as Scotland "

What r u trying to say? If scotland wants independence, it should not be allowed if the rest of britain wants to hold on to scotland?

I do not think anyone would suggest other parts of the uk should not have a say in the make up of the uk if it stays together. As such ur comments seem more like toys out the pram than any rational argument.


"SNP are ignorant of the fact that if an Independant Scotland were to attempt to join the EU how on earth would we be allowed in automatically"

are u ignorant of the precedent set when greenland had to negotiate its way out the EU when it separated from denmark.

103

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 11:14:11
100 Saruman
see my comment at #88
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/First-Scotsman-Debate-sees-.4130154.jp?CommentPage=1&CommentPageLength=1000#2850823
104

Jock Politicaljunkie,

Glasgow 29/05/2008 11:16:11
Kimba #90

You claim - "The SNP seek to get sovereignty from Westminster and give it straight to their masters in the EU instead. They are euro-nationalists who are on the side of europe and not Scotland."

That is wrong. The SCOTTISH PEOPLE have sovereignty. What the SNP are trying to do is to tear up the Act Of Union of 1707. The general mood of the SNP is indeed pro EU, but the SCOTTISH PEOPLE will retain sovereignty.

Once we are in charge of our own affairs we will be in a better position to assess whether we wish to remain IN the EU. We cannot make that assessment properly without Independence from the UK and taking up our own representation in the EU. I'm personally a Euro Sceptic but am prepared to see what life IN the EU would be like WITH proper representation.
105

CRAGman,

29/05/2008 11:17:45
I went to the Leith Folk Club instead - a much better way to spend a Scottish evening.
106

,

29/05/2008 11:19:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
107

Jock Politicaljunkie,

Glasgow 29/05/2008 11:20:46
Scotty #99.

After Independence Scotland would REMAIN in the EU because we are in it already. When Greenland got Independence (though officially this is called "home rule" - Ireland anyone?) they had to go through hoops to GET OUT. The EU is an inclusive organisation.

108

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 11:21:24
#99 Scotty F

Are you saying the whole of the UK should have a say on whether or not Scotland secedes from the union?

Are you saying that the EU might kick Scotland out?

I'm not aware of this ethnic snobbery you allude to.

Psssssssst! Your cringe is showing!
109

kimba,

29/05/2008 11:25:03
105.That's the problem, Under SNP plans Scotland would be dissolved into the EU Superstate now under construction where she would account for about 0.7% of the total EU population. The SNP would not only submerge Scotland into the EU single state but they would destroy the ancient Scottish Pound replacing it with the euro.
110

Saruman,

29/05/2008 11:25:45
#104 livilion: you’re as bad as Nicola for ducking a question. I’m well aware that the Nats can produce plenty reasons for their wish to delay holding a referendum straight away, but I was asking as to how the party will proceed in the event that said referendum is eventually held and lost.
111

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 11:25:47
102 Tellen1
OK I made an erse of that, the point remains good though: Tony Blair won 355 out of 646 seats at Westminster on a ~60% turnout, of which only 35% actually voted for his party.

35% of 60 is not gey much to take the country into illegal war, committ us to son of Trident WMDs and more nuclear power stations that cost currently about £80bn to pull down again after 25 years of unreliable service and who knows how much to store their toxic and strategically critical waste indifinitely.

Now you were saying about the minority SNP administration at Holyrood?
112

kimba,

29/05/2008 11:26:30
105.Indeed, Scotland would in effect become extinct.
113

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 11:28:55
107 Skratch me left bollack
Nope you've lost me.
What part of their election pledge to hold a referendum in 2010 have they abandoned?
114

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 11:31:11
111 Saruman,
Sorry pal but I think I answered your question before you asked it, see #88.

>>Correct me if I'm wrong but at the Holyrood elections in May last year the case for independence was put on the back burner by the SNP, and rarely if ever mentioned by them, to avoid clouding the issues as constitutionaly there was no possibility of independence even if 100% of those eligible cast their ballot for the SNP.

Considering that until the SNP took power last year their access to media coverage was severely curtailed and downright lies were being left unchallenged (McCrone etc).
It is hardly surprising and entirely understandable that the SNP want time to redress some of the longstanding untruths and propaganda the Scottish electorate have been subject to for many decades but more especially in the era of the devolution debates, too wee, too poor, too thick etc.

A referendum if proposed today would not be enacted until 2009 by which time the case for and against persevering with the Union would be made. We're talking of a difference of twelve months at most, personally I reckon I've waited this long, another year is only going to make the outcome more clearcut which I think is what we all need.<<
115

Alan B,

29/05/2008 11:31:58
#Saruman

I support independence and willing to lend the snp my vote for that purpose. As such i do not know what would happen in the unlikely :) event they would lose a referendum.

But here a 2 guesses:
1)the party would implode and split
2)the party would change and put dev max at the forefront. ie a strong scottish parliament within the uk.

If they lost a referendum before an election (that is another reason for hold just before an election) the party would probably lose that election. Salmond would go. Without him the party will lose some of its appeal.

116

Jock Politicaljunkie,

Glasgow 29/05/2008 11:35:56
Kimba #110.

Ancient Scottish Pound? Give me a break!
I don't speak Gaelic either, nor wish to learn.
I like the English - and genuinely think BOTH countries will be better off looking to their own affairs. The Czeck and Slovak Republics are BOTH better off now than they were before, to cite one example. Cr@p policy decisions made even more cr@p by twisting them to fit the one size fits all UK model has been the bane of governance in the UK for years.

Are you seriously trying to say that the EU would somehow abolish Scotland and prevent us from ever leaving the EU should we choose??? I'm a declared Euro Sceptic and even I don't believe THAT tosh!!
117

livilion,

livingston 29/05/2008 11:37:00
111 Saruman
Sorry your last point about losing an election?
Try putting that one to any politician, What is Gordon Brown or David Cameron going to do if they lose their next election?

If the people of Scotland say enough's enough then fair do's no referendum, but if your kids say they want one in their time who am I and who are you to tell them: too bad I voted for you in 2010, forget it?
118

palxRH1,

Airdrie 29/05/2008 11:40:22
Some great stuff here..

Thanks for the quote Frank (McBride)

Least we forget - Scotland is already a desert. Labour have been in office in Scotland for nearly half a century and we have absolutely nothing to show for it! It's time we all woke up! Labour should fear a referendum!

R
119

kimba,

29/05/2008 11:44:09
118. NO,I,m saying the snp would!
120

,

29/05/2008 11:49:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
121

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 11:53:42
#112 Livilion - thank you for admitting your mistake.

"the point remains good though: Tony Blair won 355 out of 646 seats at Westminster on a 60% turnout, of which only 35% actually voted for his party."

Yes thats true but then Alex Salmond in 2007 won 47 of 129 seats (36.4% of total seats) on a 52% turnout of which only 31.9% actually voted for his party.

If as you suggest "35% of 60 is not very much to take the country into an illegal war" then surely 32% of 52% is not very much to take the country into a referendum on independence?

Also technically the country was taken into the Iraq war in 2003 - so that would be based on the 2001 election when labour got 40% of the vote.
122

Jock Politicaljunkie,

Glasgow 29/05/2008 11:53:49
Kimba, #118.

What?? The SNP are going to abolish Scotland??

Get real man. There is no way they would do such a thing - and if (a big and totally hypothetical if) they tried - it's the SCOTTISH PEOPLE that have soveriegnty and if our political leaders fail our cause we will choose others that will not.

Paraphrased from the DECLARATION OF ARBROATH.
123

kimba,

29/05/2008 12:00:51
125.OK, we shall wait and see,But no one in Scotland should think that under the europhile Scottish so-called 'National' Party (SNP) Scotland would be independent.
124

kimba,

29/05/2008 12:07:04
The 1707 Treaty of Union, passed both by the Westminster and Edinburgh parliaments, reflected the combined will of both political establishments to augment the union of the crowns with a merger of national legislatures. Ending the Union demands the same mutual consent.
125

Saruman,

29/05/2008 12:13:37
#116 Alan B: it’ll indeed be interesting to see what happens if the party loses the referendum. In view of the perceived popularity (to date) of many SNP policies, I can see many in the party wishing to carry on as just another political party and ditching any constitutional agenda (aside from a demand for “devolution max”) in favour of a vague promise that the party will ensure that future generations are again consulted on whether they support Scottish separation.
The SNP seem to have filled a niche (in that they offer an alternative to the Tories that just isn’t available in England) and I don’t see them doing anything to ruin that by allowing infighting following a referendum loss to wreck the party’s standing in the polls.

126

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 12:14:40
127. Dimba

why are you pasting sections of an article by Tim Luckhurst from the Times Onsline?
127

Memyself&I,

29/05/2008 12:19:15
You're all mental.
Getting all upset over a newspapers forum.

It is a lovely day. Go outside, take a walk or something ;p
128

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 12:24:07
#127 Kimba

"Ending the Union demands the same mutual consent."

That's complete nonsense! All that's required under the act of union for Scotland to secede, is for the Scottish Parliament to assemble in Edinburgh, and declare the union void.
129

kimba,

29/05/2008 12:26:45
130/131. Because I can,maybe you would care to read my earlier posts if you want my own thoughts.
130

kimba,

29/05/2008 12:28:15
134. With the greatest respect,LET THEM TRY IT!
131

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 12:32:55
#137 Kimba

I think it's mostly done......bar the declaration.

There you go shouting again..........getting me all hot and bothered.
132

Jock Politicaljunkie,

Glasgow 29/05/2008 12:37:11
Kimba, #127.

Now you have lost the plot (having lost the arguement many moons ago)

Puting aside for the moment arguements over the result of the Referendum/the definition of Independence/and the shared common interest we may have with England -
Are you REALLY saying that if we Scots vote for Independence that London could veto this?!?

Ever heard of Democracy? Self Determination? Freedom?
Do you really think the EU and the UN would stand politely by whilst 21st Century Colonialism is invented by London?? Tanks in George Square?? Jack Boots in Sauchiehall Street?? Alec Salmond in the Tower?? I know these thoughts may be getting you exited but do try to connect with reality.

You are personally going backwards to a position that no longer exists. The concept of Self Determination has already been accepted by all sides. Sure the negotiations will be complex but it can (and in my opinion) will happen. Roll on 2010!
133

Alan B,

29/05/2008 12:40:19
#It wassnae me

Alternatively:

My name is Alex Salmond.

In 2010 I would like you to vote for an independent Scotland.

I want scotland have the right to make decisions on its own behalf to put right the failures of the union in the last 50yrs.

I want scotland to put behind it, the economic failures of the previous decades, caused by the failing union and move to match the successes of the other small western european countries known as the "arc of prosperity".

I want to use our oil wealth to regenerate scotland, using the now £6 billion surplus's, to allow us to be one of the richest nations on earth.

I want scotland to move away for the union inflicted sick man of europe. Stop our people dying early. Remove the burden of Westminster allowing scotland to flourish once again.



134

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/05/2008 12:41:08
#101 The numpties comment was aimed at politicians in general. A change of political structure is no guarantee of a change of political leadership.
135

Nikostratos,

29/05/2008 12:43:22
#31 frank mcbride,

Its a done deal then Frank "The Settle Inn in Stirling; let's say 3/9/2008 " I'll be there sitting by the fire and we will have a pint of Independence and you can give me my £100 thank you very much. Ta very nice much appreciated.
136

brownlie,

29/05/2008 12:44:52
128 It

Great post, now can you do one for Gordon Brown in defence of the union.

Few tips - Dodgy dossiers, Illegal invasion, hundreds of thousands killed, millions in exile, servicemen killed due to faulty equipment - no I won't go on - you take it from there.
137

Media 1,

cape town 29/05/2008 12:45:43
Sturgeon was foolish to suggest that the Scottish people would vote for independence at the polls right now. Dont get me wrong, I understand her position, she cannot exactly suggest that the people would say NO to independence, that would be political suicide, therefore, she has been forced into making a silly comment, because quite clearly if the SNP were totally confident of a majority yes vote then nothing would stand in their way!
The SNP is a freedom fighting liberation movement in a country that has been free for hundreds of years,so they really dont have much of a shelf life following a NO vote to independence. So it is little wonder they want to drag this out for as long as they can whilst trying to change people's minds.
138

Saruman,

29/05/2008 12:46:42
#131 Meths: you’ve got to understand that kimba’s on here for many hours. She posts her original thoughts, but then runs out of anything else to say and, perhaps understandably, makes use of such resources as the Times Online in order to chivvy along her thought processes. I’m sure there’s nothing more sinister to it than that. As one of my English Lit tutors used to say, it’s legitimate to make use of other sources to aid your own understanding and enable you to meld cogent opinions of your very own.
139

Alan B,

29/05/2008 12:48:34
#It wassnae me

Do u accept then that a independent scotland could perform better than in the union given our poor economic performance over the last 30yrs compared to other small western european countries?

The 2 big things for me are
1) the economy
2) the ability to choose our leaders and hence the political direction of scotland.

I do not actually think oil is that big a deal for england now. They have a very successful economy. Back in the 70s it was a different story.

140

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/05/2008 12:49:58
#116 There is of course option 3 - those who are the most hardline split off whilst the majority remain and continue as a gradualist nationalist party.
141

Alan B,

29/05/2008 12:55:43
#The Federalist

Yes, that is what i meant. A combination of 1 & 2.

The problem i would see the snp are a coalition of left and right. As such could they keep this coalition going if they were not bound by a common goal.

If i gave up its independence goal and became dev maxists (gradualist), would it drift to the left or right.
142

Gill,

Blairgowrie 29/05/2008 12:56:05
Kinga....you really have lost it! I had taken to ignoring your posts, as you are clearly more in need of pity, not scorn. However, just when I didnae think it could get any funnier than your own version of Primary School Politics, you prove me wrong. This lot is just hilarious - if it wasn't so sad, that is!

Can you tell me where you bought your European Politics book? And was it the same shop you got your Scottish Politics for Dummies (Victorian Edition)?

Seems to me a little MORE reading and a little LESS mouth, is the solution to your - and Tim Luckhurst's - complete lack of understanding of, well everything really.

I'm away to watch Holyrood Live, paying particular attention for any signs of Salmond's cunning plan to abolish us all!!!!!


143

,

29/05/2008 12:57:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
144

Alan B,

29/05/2008 12:59:42
#The Federalist

The only reason i could see a gradualist snp survive an referendum loss would be the weaknesses of the other scottish parties.

The lib dems and tories really are not up to the job.

The lib dems have a good message but poorly lead.

The tories really are going nowhere fast. They really need a vision for scotland. That has been lacking for so long. They are too conservative with a small "c".
145

Season Ticket Holder,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 13:01:13
Can anyone tell me where it is possible to get some balanced reporting in Scotland. I'm sick to death of reading the unionist twist to every story,in both the Scotsman and the Herald. I don't even have the stomach for these forums any more, as all it does is preserve the income for these newspapers - every time we all turn up to read or participate online they get money from their advertisers. Advertisers will either cough up on a "pay per impression" basis ( every time you click a new page) or they will pay on the basis of the average number of visitors per day. Either way, if you think what these newspapers produce is not worthy of your support then really we should stop using these pages for discussion, as it keeps them rolling in the money.

The reason their sales are dwindling is probably twofold - people don't want to read what they write, but also that people have changed the way they get their news - with more people going online. They can keep making money from advertisers who are switching their media buying from traditional ( in print) to online.

It could even be a deliberate policy to have controversial, dishonest and biased reporting simply to cause us to get on here and have a rant, and increase their clicks and therefore their revenue. You will notice several posters on here who push out short, argumentative posts to keep the discussion rolling along merrily. I would hazard a guess that they are all the same person, and the next logical conclusion is that they are employed to do so by the newspaper.

So where, oh where, is there to go to get some balanced, unbiased reporting online - not SNP biased, not unionist biased, just good old fashioned reporting.
Help me please!
146

kimba,

29/05/2008 13:04:01
Ayrshire scot/meths. you are really p---ed of that a young English woman can hold her own against the nat bully boys.
Westminster gave scotland devolution because it believed scotland should control it's domestic affairs,but the bullies of the snp think they can go it alone,if I did not care about the land of my father I would let the snp destroy scotland (as they surely will) I truly hope any referendum comes sooner rather than later,because I really believe the people of scotland will not be taken in by the snp clap trap.
147

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/05/2008 13:04:35
#152 One just has to look at what has happened to the Parti Quebecois - from being the major force in Quebec politics they are now no longer even the official opposition. That has been entirely due to the creation of the Action démocratique du Québec that has stripped a lot of PQ support through its conservative, nationalist and populist policies.
148

Calum Crubag,

Dùn Eideann 29/05/2008 13:04:48
BUT.... Malcolm Chisholm, you and Labour have been telling us for years that the SNP is a one-issue party. Now they're not? Likewise, you said that a vote for the SNP was a vote for independence.

Can we take as read that we have a mandate already for independence? Or are you changing your mind again? Or just scaremongering. Neither would surprise me.
149

kimba,

29/05/2008 13:07:26
AJ. Maybe "old magic hoops" needs to grow some b-lls,and stop being a pansy!
150

JCA REID,

Annan 29/05/2008 13:13:51
RE. ROYSTER #48. Saying basing the Scottish economy on a single commodity i.e. oil is a bit disingenuous as recently released UK Government papers under the 30year rule quite clearly stated that what has EXACTLY been going on since the Callaghan administration.
European & indeed UK sources, whether a government department, or an independent body, quite clearly state that Scotland as an independent nation would be the wealthiest nation in Europe. We have subsidised this "Union" long enough! Over 500years of war in a 300year partnership, our assets ruined & stripped for the benefits of others & our people turned into 3rd. rate specimens of humanity. I am reminded of another individual when asked if his country gained independence from Westminster how would they deal with their problems. His reply, ".....at least our problems will be our own to prioritise & to sort out." that man.... GHANDI.
151

,

29/05/2008 13:14:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
152

Nikostratos,

29/05/2008 13:18:07
#166

You can on the Scotsman...its almost compulsory
153

,

29/05/2008 13:18:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
154

kimba,

29/05/2008 13:19:19
163.THEN STOP MAKING IT A "FIGHT" as you say we are all entitled to our own opinion,but when I give mine the bully boys come out in force!
155

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/05/2008 13:20:34
#168 I think it tells us that many in the electorate are unconvinced by politicians full stop.
156

kimba,

29/05/2008 13:20:50
Meths, 167 said it for me!
157

kimba,

29/05/2008 13:24:38
OFF TOPIC, well done England on your win over the USA, and especially on Terry scoreing the first goal!
158

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 13:25:18
#169 Kimba

With the greatest respect, you do set yourself up for it!
No don't, ...no need..... I'll just p**s off anyway!
159

John PM,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 13:26:43
One of the people in the hall answered the question of the SNP's reaction to any unsuccessful referendum succinctly, ie that it would be up to ordinary party members, not Nicola Sturgeon.

Any future SNP leader who attempted to take his foot of the accelerator on independence would quickly find himself out of a job and replaced with someone else.

I personally believe like Nicola that we will win a referendum but if we don't we will reserve the right to hold another referendum until we do.

That's the only point of an independence supporting party. (And to govern effectively in an independent Scotland of course).

The Tories seemed to be against independence because they couldn't guarantee it would be right wing! Trusting the Scottish people has never came easily to that lot but the sad thing is the rest are now just as bad.
160

Stuntman Mike,

29/05/2008 13:29:23
#164 JCA Reid: I personally am quite content for the rest of Britain to benefit from Scoland’s oil wealth (while it lasts!) You on the other hand have what the Americans would label an “attitude problem”.
161

kimba,

29/05/2008 13:33:46
172. Thanx!
162

kimba,

29/05/2008 13:37:45
173. I say it as I see it,if some folks can't handle it that's not my problem,but there is no need for bullying!
163

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 13:45:03
When will Gordon Broon get it into his soft head that nobody cares what he says or does anymore. A couple of weeks ago he summoned the country's top bankers to demand they lend to each other again and cut interest rates. The result? They told him to get stuffed.

Yesterday he came to Scotland to beg the oil bosses to increase production. The result? They told him to get stuffed.

Why doesn't he now ask the electorate to give him a mandate? Perhaps he can guess the result.

Labour's problem is not their policies, not the economy stupid. No, it's just that everybody hates them.
164

Wee Beardie,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 14:06:27
9 Hmm
"... a member of the audience who asked that the Scotsman's editorial policy should reflect the composition of the panel in the debate. This suggestion was particularly well received by the audience!"

The Scotsman is entitled to pursue its chosen political policy in its editorial and comment pieces. The point I made during the debate was that "I would like to see the balance on the panel tonight reflected in The Scotsman's political NEWS coverage."

The Scotsman is to be congratulated on promoting the debate, but the sad fact is that most of the paper's political stories on its news pages have such an anti-SNP spin that they should really all be on its editorial opinion pages.

The Scotsman once was not just a respected newspaper, but also an important element in the social fabric of our country. To my great regret, neither of these is now the case.

Let us hope that, if nothing else, commercial considerations will lead to a fundamental rethink.










165

Jock Smith,

Waukesha, USA 29/05/2008 14:12:25
Anyone noticed what conservatism
( Bushism ) has done to the USA lately, and you are thinking about going back to the Maggie years again.
Independence! bring it on, sooner the better.
BTW, I am a Scot, born and bread.
166

Ananurhing,

29/05/2008 14:12:35
#178 Kimba

I agree. Sometimes you come over as very racist towards Scots in general, and the SNP in particular, so what do you expect?
I know your father is Scottish, and you've said in the past he's pretty negative and disparaging towards Scots. I think his sins have been visited upon you.
I'm sure if you showed some respect, it would be reciprocated.
167

Alan B,

29/05/2008 14:13:27
#Stuntman Mike

" I personally am quite content for the rest of Britain to benefit from Scoland’s oil wealth "

I see 2 problems with this attitude:
1)because of population differences, scotland sharing its oil wealth means giving away 90% of it.
2) the reason u would be happy to share the oil is becuase the union is to our mutual benefit. However that is not the case. Scotland has performed poorly economically compared to england and other small western european nations.

Looking at one aspect of this economic performance specficially. consider the 80s. Scotland really was subsidising the rest of the uk, meanwhile at home we had mass unemployment. The economica policies of that time created a rich south of england and poor north of britain and wales.

If scotland was rich and doing well within the union, yes fair enough share ur good luck. But to give away more of it to a richer partner, when u are struggling urself borders on the insane.
168

Season Ticket Holder,

29/05/2008 14:14:28
178 Kimba
"I say it as I see it,if some folks can't handle it that's not my problem,but there is no need for bullying!"

Who is bullying you Kimba?
The fact that more than one person disagrees with you doesn't mean that you are being bullied. You still have the same voice as anyone else; you're not being shouted over; you're not being physically suppressed - so why are you whining about being bullied?

Are you simply trying to score some points by trying to paint "nats" as bullies? Come on, stop playing the victim please and get on with some sensible discussion.
169

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 14:35:28
#168 - McMadman:

I'm sure you can't be referring to me when you say:

"unionists claiming that somehow those that didn't vote at all are represented by them is clearly nonsense"

My statistics are based on those who voted (of which 32% voted for the SNP and 68% voted for other parties) - I never made any reference whatsoever to those who didn't vote.

"Of all of those eligible to vote, this means 17% voted SNP, 33% Unionist, the majority - neither. So. Unionists are not telling the truth; one could equally argue that the majority of those eligible to vote did not vote in support of unionism (50% didn't bother, 17% went SNP)."

Your own statistics above don't paint a particularly good picture for the SNP - only 17% of the Scottish population voted for a party which has its principle policy and its whole existence based around the issue of independence. This doesn't really suggest that the population of Scotland are supportive of independence does it?

170

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 15:02:20
Going back to the story above. Labour promised us a referendum on the EU constitution in its manifesto. They lied.

The SNP has promised us a referendum on Scottish independence in its manifesto with a "likely date of 2010". Pages 8 and 15, read it here http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/ass07/man/scot/snp.pdf

Unless and until the SNP fails to keep this promise then it has my vote and Labour is just a party of proven liars. I'm delighted to see in today's papers that £millions of its loans are being foreclosed by the Co-Op bank amongst others. It's now heading for formal bankruptcy next month and senior NEC members including Gordon himself maybe personally liable for all the debts (jointly and severally) as its not a limited company. In addition the country’s three biggest unions are balloting on disaffiliating from the Labour party thereby losing it another £4m income per year. It's all good news for the SNP!
171

Season Ticket Holder,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 15:04:53
The Herald has an interesting blog by Robin Dinwoodie, which does allow comments on it, unlike his story in the paper, which has a terrible twisted bias to some unremarkable comments by an "anybody" commentator. Here's his blog!

Labour came up with their latest take on the Government's concordat with local government the other day, and on the face of it they had a good story to tell.

The press release itself was a bit of a stinker: "Single outcome agreements 'a bureaucratic and under-funded mess' says Labour," it ran, a self-referential case of the party simply quoting its own assertions.

But there were a couple of potentially interesting facts in there. "Labour understands that Cosla estimate that funding provision is around £400m short of what is required to deliver the new set of commitments." And this, buried near the end of the release in a quote from Wendy Alexander herself: "We understand that . . . seven councils have actually asked for the return of ring-fencing."

So why did you not read this story in The Herald? Because we tried to check its veracity and it came up well short. On the £400m shortfall a Cosla spokesman said: "We simply don't recognise that figure. We've no idea where it came from."

What about the seven local authorities who wanted to go back to ring-fenced budgets? "We don't know of any councils who want that."

So we held off on writing the story while we went back to Labour and asked them to firm up their assertions. First we were told that the £400m figure was actually a calculation arrived at by Professor Arthur Midwinter, special adviser to Ms Alexander. Why, then, had the press release described it as a "Cosla estimate"? Then they claimed it was indeed a Cosla estimate passed on unofficially to Professor Midwinter, even although Cosla insist they don't recognise the figure.

What about the mysterious seven councils who want to go back to ring-fencing? Labour insists that this too came from Cosla sources, but as it wa
172

Season Ticket Holder,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 15:07:27
...the rest of the Robin Dinwoodie blog

What about the mysterious seven councils who want to go back to ring-fencing? Labour insists that this too came from Cosla sources, but as it was passed to the party on an unattributable basis they are unable to name the councils.

The Herald remains willing to run with this story if it can be verified, but at the time of writing this blog Labour have still been unable to come up with anything to substantiate the £400m figure or to identify any of the seven councils said to want a return to ring-fencing.
173

Scotty F,

Scottish Borders 29/05/2008 15:10:25
My comment earlier No 99 seemed to be cut short. The rest of the comment alluded to the fact that this is a British Constitutional matter and the Irish are hardly shining examples of success. Albeit it is impressive it is more susceptible to other global economic problems than the British model.

Now Alan B the SNP are ignorant as are you because Scotland leaving the UK will have an effect on the whole of the UK. It will mean the division of National assests inc Nuclear weapons and the armed forces, pensions, intel services, the North Sea Oilfields. How much will this cost us and the rest of Britian?? Money better spent on solving the drug problem, more policemen and women which the SNP have failed to deliver on education and life expectancy issues i would imagine. Negotiations will take years and a further 10 years for the full division to take place! As for the EU issue i beg to differ on my so called ignorance. Greenland is still technically a run by Denmark(look at the current Artic dispute with Russia etc) where foreign affairs reside in Copenhagen and thus the EU their trading partners the technicality was down to the fact that greenlands largest trading partner was Canada and the US and the EU was a stumbling block to better trading relationships with them.
174

kimba,

29/05/2008 15:14:46
184. SO MAKING RUDE COMMENTS ABOUT MT WEIGHT, CALLING ME A FISH WIFE AND SOMETIMES WORSE IS NOT BULLYING,sorry, but i'm not the only one on these threads who have a pop at the snp,I think they will destroy Scotland,so do many others,but when people on these threads start getting personal that to me is bullying!
175

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 15:21:04
#142 -

"I want scotland to move away for the union inflicted sick man of europe. Stop our people dying early. Remove the burden of Westminster allowing scotland to flourish once again."

What a ridiculous comment, how on earth is the factor of Scotland being part of the UK connected to its population dying early?

Scotland becoming independent isn't going to make Glaswegians stop binging on deep-fried mars bars, fish n chips, alcohol and cigarettes is it? Or are you suggesting that if Scotland becomes independent all of the above vices will be banned?
176

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 15:21:52
#101 I have to disagree that Ireland has anything to teach the rest of us. I travelled to Waterford a couple of years ago and took a taxi from the tiny airport into town. The driver ignored the expensive looking motorway and took me along a wildly bending rural road. I asked him why he didn't take the posh looking new road and he said, "oh that was built with EU grants. They got millions but only built a couple of hundred metres and 'p worded' the rest up the wall."

I hope the Edinburgh tram system does better but after Labour's parliament building fiasco I am not holding my breath.
177

Ryan Findlay,

North Sea 29/05/2008 15:25:34
Kimba,

First let me apologise for the arrogant attitude of my compatriates.

Please understand they mean you no harm.

As thoughtful as your insight is into this debate, you must understand that they see this as an extremely important issue - as people around the world in similar situations do, however unlike most we do not take up arms and start a campaign of terror.

Remember though, our passion is no different.

We Scots are a proud people, and a proud nation, not that dissimilar to the Jews in the diaspora. We have managed to keep a national identity as a people though having no country to self govern; through much adversity, we have prospered, and become respected amongst those that know us.

We are not a stupid and child like people and we understand that our destiny lies within our own hands, whether that lies within the union or seperated from the union that is our choice to make.

My compatriates are obviously of what you would like to call "the nationalist camp". Let them put their point of views across, and let their countrymen placed in the other camp argue their points. Then let the Scottish people decide which path our country should follow in a public vote.

Kimba, you complain of being bullied. If that is the case then I ask why a Naieve English Girl is joining in a discussion about Scotlands future, and then I ask why - on top of this blatant disregard of manners - she has not, in all her posts put a single point forward for keeping the Union together.

If you have a valid point to make, make it, and I know of many a nationalist who will counteract your argument and make their own, and if you cannot counteract theirs then. Well. If you were in our position what choice would you make?

Yours,

Ryan Findlay
178

mrweetoes,

glasgow 29/05/2008 15:30:34
here is the stereotypical view of pro-union-south-east-toff-england. they think that they can somehow force our opinions to change like the media tried to on lead up to may 3rd elections

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MihcT1pO_-c#fdwt7Mz-tPg

i shouldnt really be giving this guy airspace but it is humorous
179

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 15:38:37
#194

How is it a 'blatant disregard of manners' for someone from England to join in a discussion on Scotland's future?

Are you suggesting only people from Scotland should be allowed to discuss and make their opinions known on the future of Scotland?
180

Evia,

29/05/2008 15:40:29
2 Guga II, Rockall

Guga, Labour has tried to keep the people in ignorance as to what is about to happen to our country. We were promised a referendum on the EU and Brown broke another promise - he never ever intended us to have one because he knew what the result would be.

I don't know why the British people won't get off their ar$es and do something instead of just whingeing on about things.

HJaving looked at the following, I didn't hesitate to sign petitions.

www.eutruth.org.uk/ The truth about the Lisbon Treaty - what our full immersion into EU Ocean means

strangemaps.wordpress.com/ Then scroll to 267 This shows how Great Britain will be carved up. Do you want your address to be an Area in a Region of Europe – no more UK or GB?

www.iwantareferendum.com/ Add your signature to the 45,000 plus

www.gopetition.com/petitions/gordon-brown-resign.html
Sign here to ask for Brown's resignation


181

Ryan Findlay,

North Sea 29/05/2008 15:52:35
#192

To answer your point made in paragraph three
"Scotland becoming independent isn't going to make Glaswegians stop binging on deep-fried mars bars, fish n chips, alcohol and cigarettes is it?"
I think the proverb "an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure" seems poignant. It states that there is an underlying problem that needs tackled. That underlying problem in my opinion is low self worth. Due to our current circumstances our whole nation is suffering from low self worth and we act accordingly. What we need is a vision of the future that people can believe in and live for.

Lets be fair, there are many more reason as to why Scotland should gain its own right to govern. One may be quite obvious for some one living so far north. Do you think that living in the far north has an implication on the people governing in Westminster? I think not, and I believe that if that were the case, the transport links from Inverness to other cities would have greatly improved once it became a City. What about the norths ability to provide renewable energy, or its ability to sell a large protion of its water reserves in the future. With self governance foresight and planning (the setting up of many water pipelines to the south and bulk water terminal ports near areas of excessive deposits) in a time of plenty could potentially see ourselves through a future of decreasing natural resources.

To answer your point made in paragraph three
"Scotland becoming independent isn't going to make Glaswegians stop binging on deep-fried mars bars, fish n chips, alcohol and cigarettes is it?"
I think the proverb "an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure" seems poignant. It states that there is an underlying problem that needs tackled. That underlying problem in my opinion is low self worth. Due to our current circumstances our whole nation is suffering from low self worth and we act accordingly. What we need is a vision of the future that people can b
182

Ryan Findlay,

North Sea 29/05/2008 15:53:38
#196

Yes, unless in an academic role.
183

Ryan Findlay,

North Sea 29/05/2008 15:54:24
Sorry about the repeat of paragraph three in #198
184

,

29/05/2008 15:59:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
185

Season Ticket Holder,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 16:04:28
192 Kimba
Please contribute to the debate - add something, rather than whining on and on about how you think you've been badly treated.

If you're gonna "have a pop" at the SNP please substantiate your criticism otherwise it's likely to be seen as the type of scaremongering we heard from the unionist parties before the Scottish elections last year.

You know, " business will leave in droves" " every man,woman and child will have to pay £2000 " and "the sky will fall in" type stuff. None of the bad stuff happened, and a lot of good stuff has. On top of that it becomes increasingly obvious that if the Scottish Government ( whoever is power) is to be allowed to make substantial changes to the way our country is run, then it needs more power devolved from Westminster, so that it can't be hog-tied by rules from a politically opposed UK government.


186

Alan B,

29/05/2008 16:07:16
#McMadman

U may find many of those vote have an opinion on whether to be in the union or not, but just did not or do not vote in elections.

Why do people not vote in elections for parties:
1)lazy
2)do not like the options
3)do not think it will make any difference.
4)we make it difficult to vote in this country in many ways.


187

kimba,

29/05/2008 16:14:10
203. If you care to read my posts @ 90,110,113,122,126'and 127. you would realise that only you are "whining".
188

,

29/05/2008 16:15:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
189

Alan B,

29/05/2008 16:18:03
#208 What as a scottish replacement for Lord Sutch?
190

,

29/05/2008 16:18:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
191

kimba,

29/05/2008 16:28:04
Ryan Finlay. I have put my point across many times,but have only had derogative remarks back in return,my dad is from Scotland so I know more than most about scottish history,but the snp have awakened a bigoted,arrogant,and dangerous sect,that will do Scotland more harm than good.
192

Alan B,

29/05/2008 16:28:44
#McMadman

"if you don't vote, dont complain if the end result is one you don't like."

Can agree with u regarding a referendum, but it can be difficult in elections for some of the reasons i mentioned.

For good reason many people could be sick of politicians in general. If u are a unionist and sick of labour but would not vote tory due to what it did in powers u have few options.

One of the other things it is, it is sometimes difficult to get a party who reflects ur views. It can come down to choosing a party that is the least worst option.

If i thought the snp were crap but wanted independence who would u vote for.

It is also made to difficult to vote, and many once u miss one or 2 elections can probably give up.

193

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 16:30:47
#210

"it is a lie for the Unionist parties to say that the majority of the electorate (meaning all those eligible to vote) support them, and they know this to be so."

Could you possibly direct me to a link or website where the unionist parties have made such claims so I can confirm you are right? Personally I haven't seen or heard of any such claims so I would be interested to see them.

194

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 16:34:21
Can somebody please explain to me what Wendy Alexander is for? I watched First Minister's Questions today and yet again she just made stupid faces when Alex Salmond was speaking and kept asking some totally insignificant questions about teaching policy for one year olds or something. With all the problems we are all now facing you would think she could make better use of her time.

Not that it makes any difference to me, I'm supporting Salmond anyway.
195

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 29/05/2008 16:35:36
In response to #Saruman,the possibility of a yes vote in a 2010 referendum is a possibilty,although the situation is very fluid jus tnow.I think the attitude of the SNP leadership is that a period of time would need to elapse before another referendum could be held,and that would only happen if the SNP (or anyone else) obtained a mandate from the Scottish people.As has been demonstrated several times on this site today,a mandate in UK politics is regarded as having the majority of seats,not necessarily a majority of votes.

Should the referendum be lost,the SNP will concentrate on governing well and building for the future.We have been there before in 1979 when a rigged devolution referendum was lost.The SNP did badly in the subsequent election and took some time to recover.When they did start to recover,another (succesful) referndum was held.Of course in the event of the 2010 referendum being lost,it is likely to be in a different context from 1979.For a start,the SNP will still be in government and public attitudes will be shaped by what they can achieve.I also think that if the referendum is close,say the yes vote gets 40% or more,then the psychology is likely to be that people sense a momentum for change.

My view is that even if the SNP did not exist,the changes in the modern Europe will eventually result in independence because our future generations will not want to stand on the sidelines.The Liberal reference to neverendums is a nonsense because it assummes that we can take a decision now for all future generations.One thing that history teaches us is that change is certain and that solutions fashioned in 1707 certainly need to be modified and adapted to the 21st century.The process has already started and is ongoing.
196

kimba,

29/05/2008 16:35:51
Meths. You have had your moments,but to be fair, you did support me on my weight. How's the costa del sunshine today!
197

morris,

edinburgh 29/05/2008 16:37:42
81

Just read that
Sorry but again you will not be surprised to learn that I agree 100%.Devolution is nothing of the kind.It is nothing more than power/purse strings retained at Westmonster,and more significantly oil revenues retained by Westmonster.We only got what we did ,to stop or delay us from going for independence.
I often hear people saying Scotland already has a parliament.She does but she has no control over raising her own finances and is subject to UK Scotland branch office status from Westminster .An SNP vote makes sense even if its just the fact that its accountable to the Scottish people ,and has to be better than the Westminster one size fits all solution to everything.

198

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 16:39:06
#211 kimba says "my dad is from Scotland so I know more than most about scottish history". What guff. That is like me saying "my dad is a brain surgeon so I know more about the workings of the human mind than most people".

kimba, you sound like one of those kids in the playground trying to build a reputation amongst the other kids by saying "my dad's bigger than yours". It is no wonder nobody takes you seriously. Put your arguments here in plain English, not your daddy's.
199

kimba,

29/05/2008 16:45:31
225. You want it in plain English (thought you were against anything "ENGLISH") BE MY GUEST!

The SNP seek to get sovereignty from Westminster and give it straight to their masters in the EU instead. They are euro-nationalists who are on the side of europe and not Scotland.
200

Season Ticket Holder,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 16:45:58
Kimba 206 said...
"If you care to read my posts @ 90,110,113,122,126'and 127. you would realise that only you are "whining"."

I did read those posts Kimba, but the ones where you start and continue whining are......

post 157
Ayrshire scot/meths. you are really p---ed of that a young English woman can hold her own against the nat bully boys.
Westminster gave scotland devolution because it believed scotland should control it's domestic affairs,but the bullies of the snp think they can go it alone,if I did not care about the land of my father I would let the snp destroy scotland (as they surely will) I truly hope any referendum comes sooner rather than later,because I really believe the people of scotland will not be taken in by the snp clap trap.

post 162
AJ. Maybe "old magic hoops" needs to grow some b-lls,and stop being a pansy!

post 169
163.THEN STOP MAKING IT A "FIGHT" as you say we are all entitled to our own opinion,but when I give mine the bully boys come out in force!

post 172
OFF TOPIC, well done England on your win over the USA, and especially on Terry scoreing the first goal!

post 178
173. I say it as I see it,if some folks can't handle it that's not my problem,but there is no need for bullying!

post 191
184. SO MAKING RUDE COMMENTS ABOUT MT WEIGHT, CALLING ME A FISH WIFE AND SOMETIMES WORSE IS NOT BULLYING,sorry, but i'm not the only one on these threads who have a pop at the snp,I think they will destroy Scotland,so do many others,but when people on these threads start getting personal that to me is bullying!

In fact now that I look at it, you're not just whining, you're trying to pick fights. Give it up. Say your piece and accept that others may disagree.
201

Alan B,

29/05/2008 16:47:57
#192 Tellen1

Thanks for ur reply :)

My post was hammed up, as i was replying to a poster who comments were ridiculous and i was simply turning the tables.

Having said that the main thrust of my points are true and valid.

Scotland has economically underperformed. Scotland has performed worse economically than the uk as a whole and most other small western european nations with growth of less that 2% over the last 30yrs.

The "arc of prosperity" that economist mention is those small european countries that have more that double our average growth of the last decade.

It should be noticed that most of these small nations have higher gdp per capita ppp than the uk and the other big european nations. For the unionist parties to address scotland poor economic performance they need to ask why.

This poor economic performance is made worse as we hit gold with oil but have squandered it. How many countries with oil would have not transformed themselves. How many would simply give it away for little return.

On the point of health it is a serious point, and i do not think u should be so dismissive of it.

Poor health is caused by alot of things. Low self esteem, poverty, bad diet, lack of exercise etc. Many of these things are do with poverty and the failure of our economy. I am not arguing low self esteem becuase we are in the union i am arguing becuase people are in poverty, with low paid jobs or no jobs with few prospects. U could ask why we have so many with drug addictions.

Besides the economy it is also to do with the culture of a country and addressing specific national problems. While i am not big on banning things, Jack McConnell did use the scottish parliament to try to address scottish specific issues. Banning smoking was to address a specific scottish health issue. He had completely different nhs priorities to england, as he targets scotland 3 big killers.

On another issue he tried to address sectarianism. Westminster in my time never d
202

Alan B,

29/05/2008 16:48:32
cont..

Another issue he tried to address sectarianism. Westminster in my time never did. The sp can target scottish issues. I was told by a builder friend of mine that the banning of football tops on site made a big difference to integrations of workies.

203

kimba,

29/05/2008 16:49:19
230. disagree ok, bully and ridicule NO WAY!
204

Alan B,

29/05/2008 16:51:10
#228 Royalty

Kensington
205

kimba,

29/05/2008 16:53:16
Meths. yep,it was positively p---ing down here yesterday,today it's 21c blazing sunshine!
206

Tellen1,

29/05/2008 16:56:48
No one seems to have addressed what the political system of Scotland will be like if it gains independence.

Will the SNP then disband having achieved its principle reason for existing?

Will labour, lib dems, tories reform as distinct Scottish parties seperate from the rest of the UK?

Or will Scotland effectively become a 'one-party state' with the SNP in control?
207

Alan B,

29/05/2008 16:57:04
#AM2

What would be ur improved form of devolution be?

In the summer u were pro scotland have power over corporation tax. By autumn u had changed ur mind.

What areas do u think need addressed?

Also do think there is anyway a westminster government will put the political will into turning round scotlands economy? I have seen the tories and now labour. And as far as i can see it will not happen. There is simply no economic problem unless the south of england are facing one.

U can see that from the media. How many times did the bbc mention teh recession in the late 90s. Oh they didn't it was only the recession in the early 90s as it affected england the one in the late 90s was only a few quarters of negative growth in scotland.
208

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 16:59:36
#229 kimba says "You want it in plain English (thought you were against anything "ENGLISH") BE MY GUEST!"

How is saying I support the SNP the same as saying I am anti everything English. And anyway, surely even you have enough sense to realise that the word English can mean English people or the English language so your comment is as half-baked as most of the other stuff you write in these places. If you love your "father's land" as much as you proclaim then start supporting a better future for it instead of whining and moaning against the people who are.
209

Alan B,

29/05/2008 17:01:48
#240 Tellen1

"Or will Scotland effectively become a 'one-party state' with the SNP in control?"

Are u trying to ask daft questions.

Yes the unionist parties would become independent. Yes the snp would continue to exist.

What would it be like? Well that depends on who the public vote for.

One of the positive things about PR as a voting system is that new parties can spring up easier.

Much will depend on the ability of the parties to meet the expectations of the people.

An independent country would have to resolve the issues of the day. We could have an anti eu party. Would scotland join the euro? Would we have a referendum on that or would the parties just do it if they had majority in parliament.

By the nature of independence the political debate would change as we find a new political equilibrium for scotland.
210

Saruman,

29/05/2008 17:05:13
#222 Suomi: I thought the attitude of the SNP was that a referendum could only be held “once in a generation”. If they lose, then the party will just have to recognise that, even if they obtain the majority of seats in the SP or at Westminster at some future date, this may well be because of their non independence related policies and can in no way be taken as a mandate to hold further referendums. The party is not a single issue pressure group and cannot expect to be treated as such.

If the referendum is close, it may well be that people start to question its legitimacy: will that misleading question which has been forced on the party for legal reasons, drain the result of any meaning? Also, much depends on whether there is a multi option referendum or not and the type of voting system deployed. There’s a minefield of uncertainty and it’s extremely doubtful if any “yes” vote, or even a close result, would have much meaningful credibility when attacked by opponents on such grounds.
211

Alan B,

29/05/2008 17:13:26
#AM2

"Greater fiscal accountability. That's the big one in terms of developing our enterprise culture and enhanced wealth creation."

Does that mean u are back to supporting the scottish parliament having some control over corportation taxes?

What exactly do u propose?

As i see it move to fiscal autonomy and many of the arguments for independence disappear.

Would u be against devolving:
1)transport: ie rail track so that the sp can control the structure of the organisation it is funding.
2)law and order issues: from the scottish justice minister control the number of police in a police car. silly but true. To firearms, id cards and number of days detention.
3)energy: nuclear and electricity transportation and regulation.
4)control over regulations like have super casinos
5)competition policy: so sp could address monopoly of glas and edin airports if it so wishes.

One other question:
Say it was in scotland economic interests to join the euro. Would u just stay out becuase england would not politically find support to join. (personally i could see NI joining but remaining in the UK).

bye


212

Alan B,

29/05/2008 17:16:57
#249

meant to include drugs in list of law and order issues.
213

Alan B,

29/05/2008 17:19:05
#Jackie Priest

I very much doubt they would disband. Why would they? Why disband to form a new party?

It would just continue and like the other would have to find a path for itself to follow.
214

kimba,

29/05/2008 17:35:00
243. I am supporting the people that will look after "my fathers land" as you put it,but, they will also look after my land,as Sir Winston Churchill said,"There is a forgotten,nay almost forbidden word,which means more to me than any other.That word is ENGLAND.
215

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 17:45:58
256. Kimba says "There is a forgotten,nay almost forbidden word to me.. that word is exercise"

254. I liked the WInged Messenger moniker
216

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 17:49:00
#256 In that case make a case for English independence and fight for it. I am sure all us Scot Nats here will fully support you.

But I am sorry for the problems you would face: England has no Parliament of its own and no perceived national identity or focal point (by contrast Scotland has a strong individual identity). Even the display of the English flag is sort of mixed up in most people’s minds with nasty British National Party "pit bull terrier” and skin head “bovver boot” visions. Contrast that again with Scotland whose flag flies with joy and is accepted and respected by all.

Sadly England doesn't actually exist in any meaningful sense anymore. It's like Monty Pythons' Dead Parrot. England isn't sleeping, it's dead.

The only good news for you is that the great English language lives on and thrives. It is the last memorial to a once great but now sadly lost nation.
217

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 29/05/2008 17:51:07
#Saruman,yes the current SNP leadership have said that a refererndum is a once in a generation thing.However,Alec Salmond told Jeremy Paxton that he cannot write the manifesto for future SNP leaders.I personally hope that the yes vote will win in 2010.However,should it be lost there will certainly be another referendum at some point.How quickly is likely to depend on the closeness of the result and contexts that cannot even be predicted just now.Whatever way the cards shuffle around we cannot prescibe the constitutional future for future generations.Thus my reference to this topic was to point out the absurdity of the inflexible attitude of the current Liberal leader,who bleats constently about something called a neverendum.I hope that history does not judge Nicol Stephen too harshly.

Regarding the question of mandates,of course the SNP are not a single issue party.This applies to most parties.However,the convention is that parties who win a majority of seats tend to assume that their voters are buting into everything in the manifesto.We know that is not true and it is rather irritating, but that is the way that parties behave.

I am quite happy to accept a multi-question referendum.The result might be messy,but it will act as a catalyst for further change.I would like to progress to independence in one step,however I am happy to accept increased powers for the Scottish Parliament in the shorter term,My attitude is the same as it was in 1998.I voted yes for devolution but not because I was willing to settle for that.I saw it as a step forward.I was certain that it was the start of a process and I was right.While I do support the SNP.I do not expect the continuation of the process to be dependent on politics,or a single party.I see gradual attitudinal change across all sections of our society as being the consequence of changes taking place in the modern world.Incidently,I am not against retaining the social relationships with the other UK countries,nor am I ag
218

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 17:51:54
248 Meths. A good sentiment (and we shall gloss over your famous "nuclear" post hehe). We should all try to be a bit more civil even to Nikostratus,and at least until that crap talking mong ciderman pops up at least :-)
219

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 17:58:16
256. Kimba. I think your weight is OK for your height as well. If you were a minky whale.
220

,

29/05/2008 18:02:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
221

,

29/05/2008 18:05:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
222

Alan B,

29/05/2008 18:07:40
#McMadman

i do not think they are crap either. i think they have done quite well so far. i support them and independence.

My example was referring to why people may not vote. (This was based on the way certain unionist use people that do not vote to try to show a lack of support for independence.)

I gave 2 examples one referring to unionist parties and the other snp as i was trying to make a point without trying to have a dig at unionist parties.

223

,

29/05/2008 18:12:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
224

Callum MacPherson,

Edinburgh 29/05/2008 18:13:40

The SNP are clearly not crap. And how any Scot can decry outright a government who's sole goal is the very best for Scotland and Scotland alone, I will never understand.

More importantly the Scotsman should recognise that judging from the reaction of the audience last night, there was a clear majority in favour of independence in the crowd.

Those who are considering the arguement sensibly tend to come out on one side. That is, independent, full sovereign powers for Scotland.

No one would argue Scotland is a nation. With that, Scotland deserves and would benefit immensely from a fully empowered national government.

While one might have been able to argue the case for the Union 300 years ago, it is very difficult to argue it's case today. There's no doubt it is time. Consider the debate carefully, come to the only logical conclusion and let's make real progress for our country and all who live here.

The panel last night ALL agreed, if Scotland were to become independent there would be a huge buzz across the country and therein an incredible opportunity to strike while the iron is hot and make the very best of this beautiful country we are so lucky to belong to.

Roll on the beautiful day!!

225

Alan B,

29/05/2008 18:14:10
#266

:))
226

,

29/05/2008 18:16:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
227

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 18:17:35
269. Aye Hen, all them Morris dancers, cricket matches and vicars on bicycles quaffing warm beer probabley puts off your prospects, you should try hanging around somewhere else....
228

,

29/05/2008 18:24:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
229

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 18:31:33
274, ah here you go

http://tinyurl.com/6q82ce


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyPnKwAtvTI&feature=related
230

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 18:33:39
#269 oh to think you missed out with a date with one of these guys. That's sad!

And also to think the English laugh at the Scottish kilt:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izhG427w87k

231

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 18:37:30
278. Meths

1. Of course
2. Will look

232

kimba,

29/05/2008 18:38:21
ayrshirescot,And I think you need to be taught some manners!
233

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 18:38:52
282. Ooh Kimba. hit me minky one more time
234

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 18:44:44
#284 I am a modest man (and not a born Scot - that's my excuse) so I don't have a kilt. But I guess, like Ayshire Scot's, video suggests (#276): if you've got it flaunt it. Sharon Stone sure did.
235

David MacVicar,

web 29/05/2008 18:51:17
For once some interesting posts spoiled as usual by the low level of a certain few.

It does seem that the onus is shifting towards the union having to justify its continuance. A situation that has taken long enough to come to fruition!

Scotland IS a country. The established norm is that a country, as recognised as such, governs itself. IF a country does not govern itself there therefore usually needs to be strong reasons why not.

In most cases it is because of military aggression by a powerful neighbour but that is not the case here.
In that case though their needs to be clear and overwhelming reasons why Scotland should pass its destiny completely into the hands of another political state 10 times its size.

Even the arch unionist Annabel Goldie while blethering with Brian stated her main treaty of union benefits as a seat at the security council and strong representation of British interests. However, when British interests amount to illegal wars and trident on our shores that Scottish voters dont even want then it is clear that the Union is doing the opposite of representing our interests with a strong voice. It is representing exactly what we DONT WANT with a strong voice.

Think about it.
236

Saruman,

29/05/2008 18:58:00
#285: Red Dwarf the best! Best line: broadcast in every known language including Welsh: we surrender unconditionally! (that's right: I have the same contempt for Welsh Nats!)
237

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 19:00:49
286. Meths - yahoo down, will lool later
238

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 19:04:05
285
Disagree Meths. Still Game is superb:-)
239

Conan the Librarian™,

29/05/2008 19:08:57
293
I always waited for one of the characters, when communicating on his space phone, to say "Avon calling".
240

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 19:20:24
299 - replied on HPB. Caution is urged.
241

Nikostratos,

29/05/2008 19:37:35
Oh i like red dwarf
Oh i like monty python
Oh i like rising damp
Oh i like still game (agree there got a taser handy)

Not one mentioned 'Father Ted' Racist to the core the lot em typical nats.


242

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 20:00:18
308. AM2 is full flow:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/210/498266209_63864d30c6.jpg?v=0
243

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 29/05/2008 20:16:48
#308 I will declare Jihad on anyone who "disses" (is that how the youth spells it?) Blake's 7. I was in short trousaers when I followed Blue Peter's instructions and made a Liberator teleport bracelet out of an old Robinson's Barley Water bottle. It still works to this day.
244

,

29/05/2008 20:18:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
245

,

29/05/2008 20:32:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
246

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 20:32:46
313. Is there any bum in that Video, Cider? I know they are all 30 or 40 years too old for you.
247

,

29/05/2008 20:34:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
248

brownlie,

29/05/2008 20:34:53
313 Cider

Great stuff, Cider

Probably best not to mention that at present under our benevolent unionist government those in Scotland already have an ever increasing tax burden. Bought any diesel lately?
249

,

29/05/2008 20:41:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
250

ThomasP,

Scotland, Aberdeen 29/05/2008 20:42:33
Ciderman 542000,Forres

You do speak so much rubbish that it is no longer funny.
251

Alan Reid,

NZ 29/05/2008 20:48:41
313 Ciderman 542000,

The difference betweenthe SNP and the last shower of tossers we've had for the last 300 hundred years as that. If the SNP makes a mistake, they truly care, when NL, Tories, and the like did something that f@cked up Scotland, they did it on purpose.

But people don't like change, Scotland is slowy changeing, but the SNP are wise to show Scotland that they can govern before we go for the vote.
So any more utter brainless crud you have to spew?




252

brownlie,

29/05/2008 20:50:35
319 Thomas

I would stick up for my unionist chum Ciderman - his rubbish is always funny.
253

,

29/05/2008 20:51:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
254

,

29/05/2008 20:52:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
255

 Ayrshire Scot™,

29/05/2008 20:54:52
324, Two for one and ASDA have got the better of Ciderman some time ago
256

,

29/05/2008 20:58:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
257

,

29/05/2008 21:00:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
258

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 29/05/2008 21:12:57
Given that there has been nearly thirty votes for home rule in Westminster since the union (all in the high 90's of percentage for home rule), that is once every ten years. There has also been 8 uprisings which evens out at a revolution every 37 and a half years. Now there is an english devolved administration/Scottish parliament, the increase in the frequency for winning the vote for independence increases more as the english administration loses power, as it is, slowly and surely. To suggest that this is a "once in a lifetime" event is to ignore the history and the continued desire by Scots to be free of the english yolk and the EU burden. Which will always surface as long as we know who we are. It is time for prosperity and less red tape.
259

,

29/05/2008 21:13:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
260

,

29/05/2008 21:27:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
261

,

29/05/2008 21:46:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
262

,

29/05/2008 21:50:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
263

,

29/05/2008 21:53:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
264

scotleag`,

29/05/2008 21:53:58
#333 Ciderman

Ignore the nutty nats
265

,

29/05/2008 21:55:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
266

,

29/05/2008 21:56:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
267

,

29/05/2008 21:57:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
268

,

29/05/2008 21:58:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
269

,

29/05/2008 21:59:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
270

,

29/05/2008 22:00:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
271

,

29/05/2008 22:01:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
272

scotleag`,

29/05/2008 22:02:05
stupid nutty nats
273

scotleag`,

29/05/2008 22:03:28
Well seeing you all pick on the truth eh ? ciderman that is
274

,

29/05/2008 22:04:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
275

,

29/05/2008 22:07:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
276

,

29/05/2008 22:13:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
277

,

29/05/2008 22:16:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
278

Alba Abú,

Dunedin 29/05/2008 22:34:20
Thats why they say that the sun never sets on the British empire,because God would not trust an Englishman in the dark.
279

Dan,

Pereborough England 29/05/2008 22:48:16
If God is an Englishman, why did he Give Scotland and Wales all the scenery?

Probably in pennance for Westminster I suppose.

As an Englishamn, I'd like Scotland to be given a proper referendum on Independence, if nothing else an excuse to send Gordon Brown and his cronies back over the border. Go on, admit it, Gordon Brown is secretly in the SNP and is trying to annoy the rest of the Union so much that we give you independence just to be shot of him.

We know your game - Scots - once Canny, always Canny. ;)
280

monkey man,

29/05/2008 23:57:37
The SNP are failed Westminster politicians who appeal to only the worst backward anti-English racists up here.

These idiots still think they're in 1314. The SNP also don't really want a referendum because for all the bluster they know they live off the backs of English people and Scotland would implode into the new Albania if the dullards were able to gain the vote they needed.

Let's see if slimey Salmond will put his courage and integrity to the test by saying Scotland will be free by standing alone outside the EU as a truly independent country. But he won't....as the coward he is he will readily prove when he doesn't.
281

Conan the Librarian™,

30/05/2008 00:05:45
362
Monkey man.What happened at quarter past one?

Love your comand of English by the way.

"But he won't....as the coward he is he will readily prove when he doesn't"
282

Conan the Librarian™,

30/05/2008 00:07:43
Unfortunately my typo destroyed my credibility;-(
283

ThomasP,

Scotland, Aberdeen 30/05/2008 00:33:13
362 monkey man,

"The SNP are failed Westminster politicians who appeal to only the worst backward anti-English racists up here."

Your own opinion mate. If the SNP actually did represent Anti-English in Scotland then I would be worried if I were you because Alex Salmond and the SNP are the most popular Parties currently.

You are pathetic. Do you enjoy your little bull*** stories?
284

celtic4,

USA 30/05/2008 02:53:16
Hmmm, I have just sat and read all this stuff, seemingly several different debates going on this post. As to what to do..be free? don't be free? Which countries make up Monty Python? Why isn't there an equivalent to Scottish kilt for women? Good grief!
#48 Have to wonder....
#181 Good job!
#227 Janice B..who cares?
Now then. As I sit here my mind reeling from all this, I will admit that I highly respect Scotland and your desire to be a free nation, after all, we did too. And we have been sucessful at it. Thus far anyway. Now?....who is to know? Obama is running for President.
But I have to ask...what would Braveheart do? (William Wallace NOT Mel Gibson)
285

celtic4,

USA 30/05/2008 02:56:25
OOPS!!! I meant #277 Janice B. London My eyesight blurred from reading all this.
286

getinnnn,

Scotland 31/05/2008 00:46:47
"Mr Stephen reiterated his view that there should not be a referendum unless there was a majority in Holyrood for independence"...In other words: The Majority of Scots ,Who want a referendum incedentally , will not be allowed one by the Government...which leads Me to ask: Is it the Scottish People Who are the Boss or Nicol & the Government ministers; who think they can act against the Will of the Scottish People and stop Us from telling them We are taking Our Country BACK!.
287

getinnnn,

Scotland 31/05/2008 01:04:50
The SNP are the ones Who are giving Us the referendum: First and ONLY ones. They are the first and only ones to set the date and give rightful control to the People of Scotland.
The Devil tries to be seen to outdo God and take followers to Himself: The SNP is the Referendum "God" and Wendy has shown Herself to be devilish by trying to "bring it on" but She has not got the wisdom to understand the perfect suitability and timing of the referendum: If She was organizing a football event; She would close the gates and start the game early with the Stadium only half full.
288

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta CA: for more WAR VOTE McCain 27/09/2008 15:48:21
2
Guga II,
Rockall

I am surprised that u Dude would use and expression which our evil Pres. Bush used to incite people in IRAQ.
(they should "bring it on".)

Have U allowed the cheese to slide off Ur cracker.dude.

GC

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

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

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