Reasons Scots will vote ‘Yes’ to independence – Shoogly pegs

581
8187

Analysis by Alex Porter

Scottish Unionism has seen better days and there are any number of angles on its current crises.  So, as the great referendum debate starts to take shape can the usual arguments for Union hold?

Shoogly peg 1: The media is the massage

One worth consideration is that control over the traditional media no longer equates to control over the political loyalties of Scots. Unionist politicians can gang up on a Nat in a tv debate and believe their collective reasoning to be indestructable but the Nats still win elections.  That must rankle in certain quarters.

Every year  around 1.5% of the population becomes eligible to vote. These people are young and clued-in with all things world wide web. Every year 1.5% of the population – with few internet skills – leaves Scotland to the rest of us.  Taken together these figures mean every year 3% of the voting population becomes instantly internet savvied and so the influence of traditional media dwindles.  Of course, the rest of us in the middle are not sitting still so are also becoming more internet savvy. At every passing election the Katie Grants of this world talk exclusively to her own rapidly-dwindling kind.

One very real danger for Unionism posed by the internet is that voters have so many varied sources of information.  The consequence is that their ‘bollotix’ alarm sounds at the merest hint of a dodgy narrative on TV news reports. People are not easily led or misled anymore.  It was thanks to the internet that the SNP overcame the hositility of Scotland’s Unionist media to win their historic first term in 2007.  Four years later social networking and other internet channels played no small part in delivering the SNP a majority of Scotland’s 129 seats in Holyrood.

It stands to reason then that the internet will play a key role in who wins Scotland’s independence referendum.  More Scots now get news from the internet than any other source such as the BBC and that trend is consolidated year after year in proportion to the passing of traditional Unionism and its print media allies.  Unionism depended heavily on influencing traditional media and so even if there is any substantial remaining attachment to the Union, Unionists must surely realise that it can no longer get its own way because it can massage the message.

The contrived narrative about Scots having no desire to exercise their democratic right to an independence referendum is now consigned to the midden of history where it always belonged. However, said midden will have to wait a wee while longer before giving refuge to ‘received wisdoms’ of Scotland’s pro-Union mainstream media on the subject of the benefits of independence. Will Unionism be able to bamboozle our internet savvy Scots voters into sticking with the “Union dividend” in the midst of austerity cuts? Somewhat, but Scottish nostrils will detect a reek and so an opportunity presents itself to the SNP.

Political beliefs are no longer simply drip-fed to the Scots electorate by fusty establishment figures like Jim Wallace (Lord Wallace of Tankerness) with a penchant for ermine but are arrived at using peer-to-peer recommendations via social networking channels. Scots, especially young Scots, have developed a healthy distrust of traditional media’s political commentary and reportage.  Information passed on from a friend, on the other hand, has value.  Having young bright things such as Kirk Torrance, the party’s New Media Director, to advise the SNP who have grasped this new paradigm shift leaving Scottish Unionism a decade behind the curve.

Shoogly peg 2: Independence a distraction

Watching the Unionist-leaning media having a post-mortem about what has gone wrong was the icing on the cake for Nationalist activists.  Most Scots couldn’t give two hoots what happened to Unionism.  The Unionist political establishment, or what remains of it, is shocked and the old Jedi mind-tricks that once held sway in TV political commentary are now exposed, deliciously for independentistas, as blindingly obvious scare-tactics in real-time.

The well-worn classic is the one about how debating the constitution is a distraction from dealing with the economy.  If that’s the case then how can Unionists such as former chancellor Alasdair Darling also argue that an independence referendum should be held quickly so as to minimise uncertainty for business?  If independence is not relevant to the economy then what could business be uncertain about?  People are not daft and if you treat them as if they are they’ll eventually change the channel.

For their part the Nationalists could argue that the delay in transferring tax-raising powers to Holyrood is causing uncertainty for Scottish business. Many Scottish boardrooms feel threatened by London’s current advantages and so the business landscape is now very favourable to fiscal autonomy – Unionism would be foolish to lose whatever business constituency is still retains and some, such as the decimated Lib Dems, are beginning to realise that only by proposing substantially more powers will the Scotland Bill become palatable to the Scots electorate.

Today’s Scots, and especially internet-savvy Scots, know full-well that independence is about politics and economics and therefore jobs and services – to suggest otherwise is treating the electorate contemptuously and the recent election showed that Scots have had their fill of specious, negative soundbites.

To his credit David Cameron, in reaction to the SNP’s landslide, did promise he would make a positive case for the Union during the referendum campaign.  It is not clear who in Scotland will bother to listen to the English Etonian Prime Minister, least of all Scottish pro-Union supporters.  Scottish Unionists, on the whole, have defined their Unionism entirely by what they are against and so when pushed – and they haven’t been pushed much until now – can’t express why they support the Union except in vague terms of economic benefits.

Instead, we are bombarded with the economic downside of independence but this is never convincingly substantiated by official statistics which could prove or disprove their case.  Those figures have been long concealed from public view arousing yet more scepticism of the case against independence.

Shoogly peg 3: Umbrellausterity

Which brings us to the next shoogly peg of Unionism. Scotland needs the umbrella of Union to protect it from the uncertainties of the international economy.  What planet are these commentators on?  The reality of living in UK PLC is perfectly and simply understood by all Scots who know what the word ‘austerity’ means.

Austerity cuts are imposed on Scotland by Westminster which is running an unprecendented and ballooning deficit.  UK government debt stood at £903.4 billion at the end of March and heading due North.  At the same time Scotland’s economy under the stewardship of John Swinney is in surplus.  So, despite Scotland’s economic surplus the Scottish parliament has to lose out to pay for poor house-keeping South of the border. Some umbrella.

The umbrella metaphor goes from the ridiculous to the sublime when reflecting on the plummeting value of the pound. A depreciating sterling means foreign goods and components become more expensive.  Scottish importers must then pass their increased costs on to Scottish consumers.  What is becoming clearer, month by month, is that an increasing number of economists and analysts accept that there is no reason to believe that austerity measures and historic low interest rates will do anything but make the UK economy worse.

Britain is being left behind by its key trading partners according to Scottish economist Brian Ashcroft. Germany is a manufacturing power-house and so can balance its books by exporting goods it makes. Manufacturing only accounts for 12.8% of the UK’s economy.  That is a dire state of affairs and means there’s no easy way of paying off spiralling govenment debt. Closing the gap in manufacturing would require more than a generation of capital investment.  Capital is formed by companies saving money but with interest rates held at 0.5% there is no incentive for them to save.

There-in lies the UK’s catch 22 – raising interest rates is not an option for Westminster as its debt now approaches £1 trillion and the UK’s consumer debts are higher than the rest of the EU combined.  If the people are already struggling and you land them with higher interest payments how will they be able to also pay for the government’s increased interest payments through taxation?  Some umbrella.

To continue borrowing the UK government must borrow against future North Sea oil revenues.  If it can’t then confidence in the UK economy will nose-dive and capital will flee. The fly in the ointment is the referendum on Scottish independence which is now certain after the SNP’s landslide victory. Much of the commentary from the English print media suggests that the English would be glad to get the subsidy-junkie Scots off their backs.  The London treasury knows the truth, though, and the issue of control over North Sea assets could not be more sensitive.  The truth is that Scotland’s North Sea resources are the UK’s economic umbrella.

Nationalist self-imposed shoogly peg

Set against this economic reality it makes perfect sense for the SNP to prioritise securing more tax powers for Scotland’s parliament in advance of the referendum.  If parliament secures more economic powers – especially corporation tax – then full independence will become increasingly certain as the divergence of the Scottish and English economies gathers pace.

One potential pitfall for the referendum ‘Yes’ camp though is the thorny subject of currency.  Scotland’s Finance Minister John Swinney simply must face the issue of a Scottish currency head on.  It is unfortunate and potentially damaging that the SNP are uncomfortable on the subject of advancing an independent Scottish currency as the monetary gods are currently smiling on Salmond.

With the UK’s debts mounting, London’s approach will be to continue inflating debt away by increasing the money supply.  This will accelerate the devaluation of sterling.  It matters less then if Scots keep more of their money if that money buys less and so fiscal autonomy is only part of the economic powers equation.

There is a real opportunity for the Nationalists to argue that a strong Scottish currency, backed by oil, would quickly rise in value against sterling (suddenly not backed by oil) meaning Scotland’s share of the UK deficit will be much cheaper to pay off.  The case for an independent Scottish currency can be won in the boardrooms and it simply must now be the subject of national debate.

With such a strong case to make there is no reason to risk the distrust of Scots who have shown they want to be levelled with.  And the currency issue will be brought up again and again by Unionists who sense the SNP’s unease on the subject.  With everything going the SNP’s way why would they throw a lifeline to the ‘No’ camp?

Hanging Scotland’s Jacket

Our independence referendum will of course be about many issues and at core be about how secure Scots feel about themselves and their culture.  Perhaps it is a weakness that the debate is reduced to “little more than a car boot sale haggling session” but the fact is that much of the debate will centre on the issue of economics.

The problem for Unionism is that its economic rhetoric no longer mesmerises as it once did and so the ‘No’ camp must quickly get with the internet programme.  The ‘Yes’ camp on the other hand is ahead of the game and has the momentum in a nation which seems to no longer fear the word independence any more.

The only danger for the cause of an independent Scotland is whether or not the ‘Aye’ camp will feed Scotland’s insecurities and try to sweep the issue of currency under the carpet.  If the latter want Scots to take a leap in the dark with them then Scots will have to believe that they are being told it like it is.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Email this to someone

581 COMMENTS

  1. The only danger for the cause of an independent Scotland is whether the truth shall permeate the nonsense……let’s face it, that’s a lot of Jackie Bird and Daily Record fans.

    The first order of the day HAS to be retaking the MSM. Sorry if that sounds a bit revolutionary, but I think we got a wee bit lucky here. There can be be no ‘national understanding’…and that is what I truly believe to be the case, until there is access to the facts.

    • It’s the engine driver you need, not the oil rag.
      Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.
      If you dont like what’s comming out of them, do what Busby told Ferguson when he was upset …. “Dont read them “.
      The BBC and the press are not going to change any time soon old son.

      • “Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.”

        To an extent Jim but they do have leeway in how they interview their guests. Look at the sneering of Gordon Brewer when he talks to an SNP spokesperson. The same with the Rhinestone cowboy.
        They go out of their way to ridicule any non Unionist MSP and plant in the minds of the viewer that the SNP aren’t really in charge but just minding the shop until a ‘proper’ government gets back ( Labour in their minds). Thankfully they’ve failed to stop the SNP so must be trying to figure out their next move at the moment. The fake ‘transmission problems’ when trying to connect to an SNP newspiece will last for a few weeks but that’s only a stop gap.

      • “Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.”

        To an extent Jim but they do have leeway in how they interview their guests. Look at the sneering of Gordon Brewer when he talks to an SNP spokesperson. The same with the Rhinestone cowboy.
        They go out of their way to ridicule any non Unionist MSP and plant in the minds of the viewer that the SNP aren’t really in charge but just minding the shop until a ‘proper’ government gets back ( Labour in their minds). Thankfully they’ve failed to stop the SNP so must be trying to figure out their next move at the moment. The fake ‘transmission problems’ when trying to connect to an SNP newspiece will last for a few weeks but that’s only a stop gap.

      • “Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.”

        To an extent Jim but they do have leeway in how they interview their guests. Look at the sneering of Gordon Brewer when he talks to an SNP spokesperson. The same with the Rhinestone cowboy.
        They go out of their way to ridicule any non Unionist MSP and plant in the minds of the viewer that the SNP aren’t really in charge but just minding the shop until a ‘proper’ government gets back ( Labour in their minds). Thankfully they’ve failed to stop the SNP so must be trying to figure out their next move at the moment. The fake ‘transmission problems’ when trying to connect to an SNP newspiece will last for a few weeks but that’s only a stop gap.

      • “Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.”

        To an extent Jim but they do have leeway in how they interview their guests. Look at the sneering of Gordon Brewer when he talks to an SNP spokesperson. The same with the Rhinestone cowboy.
        They go out of their way to ridicule any non Unionist MSP and plant in the minds of the viewer that the SNP aren’t really in charge but just minding the shop until a ‘proper’ government gets back ( Labour in their minds). Thankfully they’ve failed to stop the SNP so must be trying to figure out their next move at the moment. The fake ‘transmission problems’ when trying to connect to an SNP newspiece will last for a few weeks but that’s only a stop gap.

      • “Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.”

        To an extent Jim but they do have leeway in how they interview their guests. Look at the sneering of Gordon Brewer when he talks to an SNP spokesperson. The same with the Rhinestone cowboy.
        They go out of their way to ridicule any non Unionist MSP and plant in the minds of the viewer that the SNP aren’t really in charge but just minding the shop until a ‘proper’ government gets back ( Labour in their minds). Thankfully they’ve failed to stop the SNP so must be trying to figure out their next move at the moment. The fake ‘transmission problems’ when trying to connect to an SNP newspiece will last for a few weeks but that’s only a stop gap.

      • “Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.”

        To an extent Jim but they do have leeway in how they interview their guests. Look at the sneering of Gordon Brewer when he talks to an SNP spokesperson. The same with the Rhinestone cowboy.
        They go out of their way to ridicule any non Unionist MSP and plant in the minds of the viewer that the SNP aren’t really in charge but just minding the shop until a ‘proper’ government gets back ( Labour in their minds). Thankfully they’ve failed to stop the SNP so must be trying to figure out their next move at the moment. The fake ‘transmission problems’ when trying to connect to an SNP newspiece will last for a few weeks but that’s only a stop gap.

    • It’s the engine driver you need, not the oil rag.
      Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.
      If you dont like what’s comming out of them, do what Busby told Ferguson when he was upset …. “Dont read them “.
      The BBC and the press are not going to change any time soon old son.

    • It’s the engine driver you need, not the oil rag.
      Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.
      If you dont like what’s comming out of them, do what Busby told Ferguson when he was upset …. “Dont read them “.
      The BBC and the press are not going to change any time soon old son.

    • It’s the engine driver you need, not the oil rag.
      Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.
      If you dont like what’s comming out of them, do what Busby told Ferguson when he was upset …. “Dont read them “.
      The BBC and the press are not going to change any time soon old son.

    • It’s the engine driver you need, not the oil rag.
      Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.
      If you dont like what’s comming out of them, do what Busby told Ferguson when he was upset …. “Dont read them “.
      The BBC and the press are not going to change any time soon old son.

    • It’s the engine driver you need, not the oil rag.
      Jackie Bird and all the rest of the front mouth pieces on tv and in the press, only read what’s put on the idiot boards in front of them.
      If you dont like what’s comming out of them, do what Busby told Ferguson when he was upset …. “Dont read them “.
      The BBC and the press are not going to change any time soon old son.

  2. The only danger for the cause of an independent Scotland is whether the truth shall permeate the nonsense……let’s face it, that’s a lot of Jackie Bird and Daily Record fans.

    The first order of the day HAS to be retaking the MSM. Sorry if that sounds a bit revolutionary, but I think we got a wee bit lucky here. There can be be no ‘national understanding’…and that is what I truly believe to be the case, until there is access to the facts.

  3. The only danger for the cause of an independent Scotland is whether the truth shall permeate the nonsense……let’s face it, that’s a lot of Jackie Bird and Daily Record fans.

    The first order of the day HAS to be retaking the MSM. Sorry if that sounds a bit revolutionary, but I think we got a wee bit lucky here. There can be be no ‘national understanding’…and that is what I truly believe to be the case, until there is access to the facts.

  4. The only danger for the cause of an independent Scotland is whether the truth shall permeate the nonsense……let’s face it, that’s a lot of Jackie Bird and Daily Record fans.

    The first order of the day HAS to be retaking the MSM. Sorry if that sounds a bit revolutionary, but I think we got a wee bit lucky here. There can be be no ‘national understanding’…and that is what I truly believe to be the case, until there is access to the facts.

  5. The only danger for the cause of an independent Scotland is whether the truth shall permeate the nonsense……let’s face it, that’s a lot of Jackie Bird and Daily Record fans.

    The first order of the day HAS to be retaking the MSM. Sorry if that sounds a bit revolutionary, but I think we got a wee bit lucky here. There can be be no ‘national understanding’…and that is what I truly believe to be the case, until there is access to the facts.

  6. The only danger for the cause of an independent Scotland is whether the truth shall permeate the nonsense……let’s face it, that’s a lot of Jackie Bird and Daily Record fans.

    The first order of the day HAS to be retaking the MSM. Sorry if that sounds a bit revolutionary, but I think we got a wee bit lucky here. There can be be no ‘national understanding’…and that is what I truly believe to be the case, until there is access to the facts.

  7. The “we’ll keep sterling” is a fairly silly idea.

    As an independent country, Scotland must have its own currency (you can’t actually use Bank of England notes, and rely on the BoE to give you sufficient of them!), although like the Irish punt of yore it may decide to shadow sterling or the euro in the short term. In the early transition year(s), shadowing sterling makes sense.

    Thereafter, we move towards whatever currency scenario makes sense. In reality that would mean an independent Scottish pound, or adopting the Euro.

  8. The “we’ll keep sterling” is a fairly silly idea.

    As an independent country, Scotland must have its own currency (you can’t actually use Bank of England notes, and rely on the BoE to give you sufficient of them!), although like the Irish punt of yore it may decide to shadow sterling or the euro in the short term. In the early transition year(s), shadowing sterling makes sense.

    Thereafter, we move towards whatever currency scenario makes sense. In reality that would mean an independent Scottish pound, or adopting the Euro.

  9. The “we’ll keep sterling” is a fairly silly idea.

    As an independent country, Scotland must have its own currency (you can’t actually use Bank of England notes, and rely on the BoE to give you sufficient of them!), although like the Irish punt of yore it may decide to shadow sterling or the euro in the short term. In the early transition year(s), shadowing sterling makes sense.

    Thereafter, we move towards whatever currency scenario makes sense. In reality that would mean an independent Scottish pound, or adopting the Euro.

  10. The “we’ll keep sterling” is a fairly silly idea.

    As an independent country, Scotland must have its own currency (you can’t actually use Bank of England notes, and rely on the BoE to give you sufficient of them!), although like the Irish punt of yore it may decide to shadow sterling or the euro in the short term. In the early transition year(s), shadowing sterling makes sense.

    Thereafter, we move towards whatever currency scenario makes sense. In reality that would mean an independent Scottish pound, or adopting the Euro.

  11. The “we’ll keep sterling” is a fairly silly idea.

    As an independent country, Scotland must have its own currency (you can’t actually use Bank of England notes, and rely on the BoE to give you sufficient of them!), although like the Irish punt of yore it may decide to shadow sterling or the euro in the short term. In the early transition year(s), shadowing sterling makes sense.

    Thereafter, we move towards whatever currency scenario makes sense. In reality that would mean an independent Scottish pound, or adopting the Euro.

  12. The “we’ll keep sterling” is a fairly silly idea.

    As an independent country, Scotland must have its own currency (you can’t actually use Bank of England notes, and rely on the BoE to give you sufficient of them!), although like the Irish punt of yore it may decide to shadow sterling or the euro in the short term. In the early transition year(s), shadowing sterling makes sense.

    Thereafter, we move towards whatever currency scenario makes sense. In reality that would mean an independent Scottish pound, or adopting the Euro.

  13. Excellent piece.
    Alex is right.We must start asking the big questions regarding media control,economics and finance.

  14. Excellent piece.
    Alex is right.We must start asking the big questions regarding media control,economics and finance.

  15. Excellent piece.
    Alex is right.We must start asking the big questions regarding media control,economics and finance.

  16. Excellent piece.
    Alex is right.We must start asking the big questions regarding media control,economics and finance.

  17. Excellent piece.
    Alex is right.We must start asking the big questions regarding media control,economics and finance.

  18. Excellent piece.
    Alex is right.We must start asking the big questions regarding media control,economics and finance.

  19. Excellent article. Not having an economics background I don’t know the arguments for or against a Scottish currency but one backed by Oil makes sense.

    The most important aspect of the article is the yearly weakening of the print and TV media and the growing power of the internet.

    This combination has certainly broken the power of the unionists to brow beat the Scots into rejecting Independence.

    Hitler new the power of propaganda more than most and the unionists have it used it unmercifully for decades to keep the Scots in line.

    But as you say Alex, the Scots no longer fear the concept of Independence and another 3/4 years of solid SNP Government preceding the Independence Referendum will give the YES camp a head start.

    Bring It On!

  20. Excellent article. Not having an economics background I don’t know the arguments for or against a Scottish currency but one backed by Oil makes sense.

    The most important aspect of the article is the yearly weakening of the print and TV media and the growing power of the internet.

    This combination has certainly broken the power of the unionists to brow beat the Scots into rejecting Independence.

    Hitler new the power of propaganda more than most and the unionists have it used it unmercifully for decades to keep the Scots in line.

    But as you say Alex, the Scots no longer fear the concept of Independence and another 3/4 years of solid SNP Government preceding the Independence Referendum will give the YES camp a head start.

    Bring It On!

  21. Excellent article. Not having an economics background I don’t know the arguments for or against a Scottish currency but one backed by Oil makes sense.

    The most important aspect of the article is the yearly weakening of the print and TV media and the growing power of the internet.

    This combination has certainly broken the power of the unionists to brow beat the Scots into rejecting Independence.

    Hitler new the power of propaganda more than most and the unionists have it used it unmercifully for decades to keep the Scots in line.

    But as you say Alex, the Scots no longer fear the concept of Independence and another 3/4 years of solid SNP Government preceding the Independence Referendum will give the YES camp a head start.

    Bring It On!

  22. Excellent article. Not having an economics background I don’t know the arguments for or against a Scottish currency but one backed by Oil makes sense.

    The most important aspect of the article is the yearly weakening of the print and TV media and the growing power of the internet.

    This combination has certainly broken the power of the unionists to brow beat the Scots into rejecting Independence.

    Hitler new the power of propaganda more than most and the unionists have it used it unmercifully for decades to keep the Scots in line.

    But as you say Alex, the Scots no longer fear the concept of Independence and another 3/4 years of solid SNP Government preceding the Independence Referendum will give the YES camp a head start.

    Bring It On!

  23. Excellent article. Not having an economics background I don’t know the arguments for or against a Scottish currency but one backed by Oil makes sense.

    The most important aspect of the article is the yearly weakening of the print and TV media and the growing power of the internet.

    This combination has certainly broken the power of the unionists to brow beat the Scots into rejecting Independence.

    Hitler new the power of propaganda more than most and the unionists have it used it unmercifully for decades to keep the Scots in line.

    But as you say Alex, the Scots no longer fear the concept of Independence and another 3/4 years of solid SNP Government preceding the Independence Referendum will give the YES camp a head start.

    Bring It On!

  24. Excellent article. Not having an economics background I don’t know the arguments for or against a Scottish currency but one backed by Oil makes sense.

    The most important aspect of the article is the yearly weakening of the print and TV media and the growing power of the internet.

    This combination has certainly broken the power of the unionists to brow beat the Scots into rejecting Independence.

    Hitler new the power of propaganda more than most and the unionists have it used it unmercifully for decades to keep the Scots in line.

    But as you say Alex, the Scots no longer fear the concept of Independence and another 3/4 years of solid SNP Government preceding the Independence Referendum will give the YES camp a head start.

    Bring It On!

  25. I agree with this article almost wholeheartedly but I see the currency issue as a stumbling block.

    There is nothing the unionists prefer than propagating fear – the fear of the unknown – border controls, defence concerns and funny money to name a few.

    Yes, of course, there is a hugely compelling argument for a Scottish currency and the reasons are put forward with clarity above. If we had a mature debate the Scottish Currency side would win. However we know and understand the wider media environment is hostile and that they would be all over this idea like a rash. The last thing they want is a mature debate and boy don’t they have form for dragging things into the gutter! I believe we have two clear choices:

    1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.

    2/We attempt to shape the debate with our (still relatively) limited media resources. We hope our positive narrative and truth is not swamped by the fear agenda.

    If we go steadily we are assured of our end goal, if we are impatient and try to push too hard too soon we have the danger of being beaten by fear and delaying this goal for a generation.

    I believe the way forward is not through attempting to tackle big, emotive “separative”,ahem, issues like that head on, our strategy must be far more deft and subtle. We must wrong foot the peddlers of fear and keep them guessing.

    The Scottish Government clearly has the strategic upper hand [i]vis a vis[/i] the referendum. They are now setting the terms for the debate and who could reasonably argue against the progress they have achieved with what is, apparently, a gradualist strategy.

    Slow and steady wins the race for me!

    • I agree with your analysis to a certain extent Dougie, but we must also consider whether or not we’ll have the chance to bring a further referendum in the future, if we have a ‘stop off’ along the current path, at some halfway house…

      People might become complacent and comfortable and adopt the ‘if it aint broke dont fix it’ mantra for sometime into the forseeable future, if we do

      People are naturally averse to change, and that could put full sovereignty and independence for our country onto the back burner for another generation at least.

      By also leaving the unionistas in control of policies in Scotland where they can cause real harm to us, socially and economically, we are giving them the tools to regroup and establish themselves again, or else cause real damage in retaliation for our ‘rejection’ of them..

      In my view this is a once in a lifetime opportunity as the gods have conspired to present us with the ‘perfect storm’..

      We have a minority Tory govt down south, a UK economy in bits, a Scots economy in surplus, the biggest austerity cuts for a generation winging their way North. We have many genuine examples of grievance that we can hold hold up to the electorate and say ‘we can manage this better ourselves’, we have momentum, we have in Alex Salmond a politician who is (forgive me) ‘uniting the clans’ as evidenced by the recent landslide victory…

      I could go on and on, but basically I believe we’ll never have a better chance to take back what is rightfully ours

      As a wee PS, and on the currency front, I can see where you are coming from, but we have to remember that many dont accept legitimate Scottish notes down south anyway as it stands…

      They may do, when it becomes a much stronger currency 🙂

    • I agree with your analysis to a certain extent Dougie, but we must also consider whether or not we’ll have the chance to bring a further referendum in the future, if we have a ‘stop off’ along the current path, at some halfway house…

      People might become complacent and comfortable and adopt the ‘if it aint broke dont fix it’ mantra for sometime into the forseeable future, if we do

      People are naturally averse to change, and that could put full sovereignty and independence for our country onto the back burner for another generation at least.

      By also leaving the unionistas in control of policies in Scotland where they can cause real harm to us, socially and economically, we are giving them the tools to regroup and establish themselves again, or else cause real damage in retaliation for our ‘rejection’ of them..

      In my view this is a once in a lifetime opportunity as the gods have conspired to present us with the ‘perfect storm’..

      We have a minority Tory govt down south, a UK economy in bits, a Scots economy in surplus, the biggest austerity cuts for a generation winging their way North. We have many genuine examples of grievance that we can hold hold up to the electorate and say ‘we can manage this better ourselves’, we have momentum, we have in Alex Salmond a politician who is (forgive me) ‘uniting the clans’ as evidenced by the recent landslide victory…

      I could go on and on, but basically I believe we’ll never have a better chance to take back what is rightfully ours

      As a wee PS, and on the currency front, I can see where you are coming from, but we have to remember that many dont accept legitimate Scottish notes down south anyway as it stands…

      They may do, when it becomes a much stronger currency 🙂

    • I agree with your analysis to a certain extent Dougie, but we must also consider whether or not we’ll have the chance to bring a further referendum in the future, if we have a ‘stop off’ along the current path, at some halfway house…

      People might become complacent and comfortable and adopt the ‘if it aint broke dont fix it’ mantra for sometime into the forseeable future, if we do

      People are naturally averse to change, and that could put full sovereignty and independence for our country onto the back burner for another generation at least.

      By also leaving the unionistas in control of policies in Scotland where they can cause real harm to us, socially and economically, we are giving them the tools to regroup and establish themselves again, or else cause real damage in retaliation for our ‘rejection’ of them..

      In my view this is a once in a lifetime opportunity as the gods have conspired to present us with the ‘perfect storm’..

      We have a minority Tory govt down south, a UK economy in bits, a Scots economy in surplus, the biggest austerity cuts for a generation winging their way North. We have many genuine examples of grievance that we can hold hold up to the electorate and say ‘we can manage this better ourselves’, we have momentum, we have in Alex Salmond a politician who is (forgive me) ‘uniting the clans’ as evidenced by the recent landslide victory…

      I could go on and on, but basically I believe we’ll never have a better chance to take back what is rightfully ours

      As a wee PS, and on the currency front, I can see where you are coming from, but we have to remember that many dont accept legitimate Scottish notes down south anyway as it stands…

      They may do, when it becomes a much stronger currency 🙂

    • I agree with your analysis to a certain extent Dougie, but we must also consider whether or not we’ll have the chance to bring a further referendum in the future, if we have a ‘stop off’ along the current path, at some halfway house…

      People might become complacent and comfortable and adopt the ‘if it aint broke dont fix it’ mantra for sometime into the forseeable future, if we do

      People are naturally averse to change, and that could put full sovereignty and independence for our country onto the back burner for another generation at least.

      By also leaving the unionistas in control of policies in Scotland where they can cause real harm to us, socially and economically, we are giving them the tools to regroup and establish themselves again, or else cause real damage in retaliation for our ‘rejection’ of them..

      In my view this is a once in a lifetime opportunity as the gods have conspired to present us with the ‘perfect storm’..

      We have a minority Tory govt down south, a UK economy in bits, a Scots economy in surplus, the biggest austerity cuts for a generation winging their way North. We have many genuine examples of grievance that we can hold hold up to the electorate and say ‘we can manage this better ourselves’, we have momentum, we have in Alex Salmond a politician who is (forgive me) ‘uniting the clans’ as evidenced by the recent landslide victory…

      I could go on and on, but basically I believe we’ll never have a better chance to take back what is rightfully ours

      As a wee PS, and on the currency front, I can see where you are coming from, but we have to remember that many dont accept legitimate Scottish notes down south anyway as it stands…

      They may do, when it becomes a much stronger currency 🙂

    • I agree with your analysis to a certain extent Dougie, but we must also consider whether or not we’ll have the chance to bring a further referendum in the future, if we have a ‘stop off’ along the current path, at some halfway house…

      People might become complacent and comfortable and adopt the ‘if it aint broke dont fix it’ mantra for sometime into the forseeable future, if we do

      People are naturally averse to change, and that could put full sovereignty and independence for our country onto the back burner for another generation at least.

      By also leaving the unionistas in control of policies in Scotland where they can cause real harm to us, socially and economically, we are giving them the tools to regroup and establish themselves again, or else cause real damage in retaliation for our ‘rejection’ of them..

      In my view this is a once in a lifetime opportunity as the gods have conspired to present us with the ‘perfect storm’..

      We have a minority Tory govt down south, a UK economy in bits, a Scots economy in surplus, the biggest austerity cuts for a generation winging their way North. We have many genuine examples of grievance that we can hold hold up to the electorate and say ‘we can manage this better ourselves’, we have momentum, we have in Alex Salmond a politician who is (forgive me) ‘uniting the clans’ as evidenced by the recent landslide victory…

      I could go on and on, but basically I believe we’ll never have a better chance to take back what is rightfully ours

      As a wee PS, and on the currency front, I can see where you are coming from, but we have to remember that many dont accept legitimate Scottish notes down south anyway as it stands…

      They may do, when it becomes a much stronger currency 🙂

    • I agree with your analysis to a certain extent Dougie, but we must also consider whether or not we’ll have the chance to bring a further referendum in the future, if we have a ‘stop off’ along the current path, at some halfway house…

      People might become complacent and comfortable and adopt the ‘if it aint broke dont fix it’ mantra for sometime into the forseeable future, if we do

      People are naturally averse to change, and that could put full sovereignty and independence for our country onto the back burner for another generation at least.

      By also leaving the unionistas in control of policies in Scotland where they can cause real harm to us, socially and economically, we are giving them the tools to regroup and establish themselves again, or else cause real damage in retaliation for our ‘rejection’ of them..

      In my view this is a once in a lifetime opportunity as the gods have conspired to present us with the ‘perfect storm’..

      We have a minority Tory govt down south, a UK economy in bits, a Scots economy in surplus, the biggest austerity cuts for a generation winging their way North. We have many genuine examples of grievance that we can hold hold up to the electorate and say ‘we can manage this better ourselves’, we have momentum, we have in Alex Salmond a politician who is (forgive me) ‘uniting the clans’ as evidenced by the recent landslide victory…

      I could go on and on, but basically I believe we’ll never have a better chance to take back what is rightfully ours

      As a wee PS, and on the currency front, I can see where you are coming from, but we have to remember that many dont accept legitimate Scottish notes down south anyway as it stands…

      They may do, when it becomes a much stronger currency 🙂

  26. I agree with this article almost wholeheartedly but I see the currency issue as a stumbling block.

    There is nothing the unionists prefer than propagating fear – the fear of the unknown – border controls, defence concerns and funny money to name a few.

    Yes, of course, there is a hugely compelling argument for a Scottish currency and the reasons are put forward with clarity above. If we had a mature debate the Scottish Currency side would win. However we know and understand the wider media environment is hostile and that they would be all over this idea like a rash. The last thing they want is a mature debate and boy don’t they have form for dragging things into the gutter! I believe we have two clear choices:

    1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.

    2/We attempt to shape the debate with our (still relatively) limited media resources. We hope our positive narrative and truth is not swamped by the fear agenda.

    If we go steadily we are assured of our end goal, if we are impatient and try to push too hard too soon we have the danger of being beaten by fear and delaying this goal for a generation.

    I believe the way forward is not through attempting to tackle big, emotive “separative”,ahem, issues like that head on, our strategy must be far more deft and subtle. We must wrong foot the peddlers of fear and keep them guessing.

    The Scottish Government clearly has the strategic upper hand [i]vis a vis[/i] the referendum. They are now setting the terms for the debate and who could reasonably argue against the progress they have achieved with what is, apparently, a gradualist strategy.

    Slow and steady wins the race for me!

  27. I agree with this article almost wholeheartedly but I see the currency issue as a stumbling block.

    There is nothing the unionists prefer than propagating fear – the fear of the unknown – border controls, defence concerns and funny money to name a few.

    Yes, of course, there is a hugely compelling argument for a Scottish currency and the reasons are put forward with clarity above. If we had a mature debate the Scottish Currency side would win. However we know and understand the wider media environment is hostile and that they would be all over this idea like a rash. The last thing they want is a mature debate and boy don’t they have form for dragging things into the gutter! I believe we have two clear choices:

    1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.

    2/We attempt to shape the debate with our (still relatively) limited media resources. We hope our positive narrative and truth is not swamped by the fear agenda.

    If we go steadily we are assured of our end goal, if we are impatient and try to push too hard too soon we have the danger of being beaten by fear and delaying this goal for a generation.

    I believe the way forward is not through attempting to tackle big, emotive “separative”,ahem, issues like that head on, our strategy must be far more deft and subtle. We must wrong foot the peddlers of fear and keep them guessing.

    The Scottish Government clearly has the strategic upper hand [i]vis a vis[/i] the referendum. They are now setting the terms for the debate and who could reasonably argue against the progress they have achieved with what is, apparently, a gradualist strategy.

    Slow and steady wins the race for me!

  28. I agree with this article almost wholeheartedly but I see the currency issue as a stumbling block.

    There is nothing the unionists prefer than propagating fear – the fear of the unknown – border controls, defence concerns and funny money to name a few.

    Yes, of course, there is a hugely compelling argument for a Scottish currency and the reasons are put forward with clarity above. If we had a mature debate the Scottish Currency side would win. However we know and understand the wider media environment is hostile and that they would be all over this idea like a rash. The last thing they want is a mature debate and boy don’t they have form for dragging things into the gutter! I believe we have two clear choices:

    1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.

    2/We attempt to shape the debate with our (still relatively) limited media resources. We hope our positive narrative and truth is not swamped by the fear agenda.

    If we go steadily we are assured of our end goal, if we are impatient and try to push too hard too soon we have the danger of being beaten by fear and delaying this goal for a generation.

    I believe the way forward is not through attempting to tackle big, emotive “separative”,ahem, issues like that head on, our strategy must be far more deft and subtle. We must wrong foot the peddlers of fear and keep them guessing.

    The Scottish Government clearly has the strategic upper hand [i]vis a vis[/i] the referendum. They are now setting the terms for the debate and who could reasonably argue against the progress they have achieved with what is, apparently, a gradualist strategy.

    Slow and steady wins the race for me!

  29. I agree with this article almost wholeheartedly but I see the currency issue as a stumbling block.

    There is nothing the unionists prefer than propagating fear – the fear of the unknown – border controls, defence concerns and funny money to name a few.

    Yes, of course, there is a hugely compelling argument for a Scottish currency and the reasons are put forward with clarity above. If we had a mature debate the Scottish Currency side would win. However we know and understand the wider media environment is hostile and that they would be all over this idea like a rash. The last thing they want is a mature debate and boy don’t they have form for dragging things into the gutter! I believe we have two clear choices:

    1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.

    2/We attempt to shape the debate with our (still relatively) limited media resources. We hope our positive narrative and truth is not swamped by the fear agenda.

    If we go steadily we are assured of our end goal, if we are impatient and try to push too hard too soon we have the danger of being beaten by fear and delaying this goal for a generation.

    I believe the way forward is not through attempting to tackle big, emotive “separative”,ahem, issues like that head on, our strategy must be far more deft and subtle. We must wrong foot the peddlers of fear and keep them guessing.

    The Scottish Government clearly has the strategic upper hand [i]vis a vis[/i] the referendum. They are now setting the terms for the debate and who could reasonably argue against the progress they have achieved with what is, apparently, a gradualist strategy.

    Slow and steady wins the race for me!

  30. I agree with this article almost wholeheartedly but I see the currency issue as a stumbling block.

    There is nothing the unionists prefer than propagating fear – the fear of the unknown – border controls, defence concerns and funny money to name a few.

    Yes, of course, there is a hugely compelling argument for a Scottish currency and the reasons are put forward with clarity above. If we had a mature debate the Scottish Currency side would win. However we know and understand the wider media environment is hostile and that they would be all over this idea like a rash. The last thing they want is a mature debate and boy don’t they have form for dragging things into the gutter! I believe we have two clear choices:

    1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.

    2/We attempt to shape the debate with our (still relatively) limited media resources. We hope our positive narrative and truth is not swamped by the fear agenda.

    If we go steadily we are assured of our end goal, if we are impatient and try to push too hard too soon we have the danger of being beaten by fear and delaying this goal for a generation.

    I believe the way forward is not through attempting to tackle big, emotive “separative”,ahem, issues like that head on, our strategy must be far more deft and subtle. We must wrong foot the peddlers of fear and keep them guessing.

    The Scottish Government clearly has the strategic upper hand [i]vis a vis[/i] the referendum. They are now setting the terms for the debate and who could reasonably argue against the progress they have achieved with what is, apparently, a gradualist strategy.

    Slow and steady wins the race for me!

  31. Excellent and interesting article.
    Although no economist myself the arguments you put forward for a Scottish £ sound logical enough to me.

    One ommission in your article is EU or out of EU.

    Personally i would like us to adopt the same position as Norway.
    With 60% of Europes Oil reserves I anticipate little resistance from Brussels to us gaining favourable terms of trade without all the added burden and corruption of full membership.

    We could reclaim our fishing waters for our own fisherman,not trade their rights to protect City of London.
    Let us also not forget we are an exporter of food ,unlike UK.
    So the EU would pay attention to our requests for partial membership.

    One other point missed in Alex’s article is that it is in the older age group that there is the most resistance to Independence.
    The baby boomers are now hitting their 60s these were the vanguard of the SNP resurgence from 1967 ,Hamilton onwards.
    The campaigners from those days 19-25 yr olds are now 62-68yrs old.
    Each year in Scotland approx 50,000+ people die .
    The majority fortunately have had a good long life .
    Without seeming like a political vulture ,these are your older Unionist types.
    Unionism is literally dying out.

  32. Excellent and interesting article.
    Although no economist myself the arguments you put forward for a Scottish £ sound logical enough to me.

    One ommission in your article is EU or out of EU.

    Personally i would like us to adopt the same position as Norway.
    With 60% of Europes Oil reserves I anticipate little resistance from Brussels to us gaining favourable terms of trade without all the added burden and corruption of full membership.

    We could reclaim our fishing waters for our own fisherman,not trade their rights to protect City of London.
    Let us also not forget we are an exporter of food ,unlike UK.
    So the EU would pay attention to our requests for partial membership.

    One other point missed in Alex’s article is that it is in the older age group that there is the most resistance to Independence.
    The baby boomers are now hitting their 60s these were the vanguard of the SNP resurgence from 1967 ,Hamilton onwards.
    The campaigners from those days 19-25 yr olds are now 62-68yrs old.
    Each year in Scotland approx 50,000+ people die .
    The majority fortunately have had a good long life .
    Without seeming like a political vulture ,these are your older Unionist types.
    Unionism is literally dying out.

  33. Excellent and interesting article.
    Although no economist myself the arguments you put forward for a Scottish £ sound logical enough to me.

    One ommission in your article is EU or out of EU.

    Personally i would like us to adopt the same position as Norway.
    With 60% of Europes Oil reserves I anticipate little resistance from Brussels to us gaining favourable terms of trade without all the added burden and corruption of full membership.

    We could reclaim our fishing waters for our own fisherman,not trade their rights to protect City of London.
    Let us also not forget we are an exporter of food ,unlike UK.
    So the EU would pay attention to our requests for partial membership.

    One other point missed in Alex’s article is that it is in the older age group that there is the most resistance to Independence.
    The baby boomers are now hitting their 60s these were the vanguard of the SNP resurgence from 1967 ,Hamilton onwards.
    The campaigners from those days 19-25 yr olds are now 62-68yrs old.
    Each year in Scotland approx 50,000+ people die .
    The majority fortunately have had a good long life .
    Without seeming like a political vulture ,these are your older Unionist types.
    Unionism is literally dying out.

  34. Excellent and interesting article.
    Although no economist myself the arguments you put forward for a Scottish £ sound logical enough to me.

    One ommission in your article is EU or out of EU.

    Personally i would like us to adopt the same position as Norway.
    With 60% of Europes Oil reserves I anticipate little resistance from Brussels to us gaining favourable terms of trade without all the added burden and corruption of full membership.

    We could reclaim our fishing waters for our own fisherman,not trade their rights to protect City of London.
    Let us also not forget we are an exporter of food ,unlike UK.
    So the EU would pay attention to our requests for partial membership.

    One other point missed in Alex’s article is that it is in the older age group that there is the most resistance to Independence.
    The baby boomers are now hitting their 60s these were the vanguard of the SNP resurgence from 1967 ,Hamilton onwards.
    The campaigners from those days 19-25 yr olds are now 62-68yrs old.
    Each year in Scotland approx 50,000+ people die .
    The majority fortunately have had a good long life .
    Without seeming like a political vulture ,these are your older Unionist types.
    Unionism is literally dying out.

  35. Excellent and interesting article.
    Although no economist myself the arguments you put forward for a Scottish £ sound logical enough to me.

    One ommission in your article is EU or out of EU.

    Personally i would like us to adopt the same position as Norway.
    With 60% of Europes Oil reserves I anticipate little resistance from Brussels to us gaining favourable terms of trade without all the added burden and corruption of full membership.

    We could reclaim our fishing waters for our own fisherman,not trade their rights to protect City of London.
    Let us also not forget we are an exporter of food ,unlike UK.
    So the EU would pay attention to our requests for partial membership.

    One other point missed in Alex’s article is that it is in the older age group that there is the most resistance to Independence.
    The baby boomers are now hitting their 60s these were the vanguard of the SNP resurgence from 1967 ,Hamilton onwards.
    The campaigners from those days 19-25 yr olds are now 62-68yrs old.
    Each year in Scotland approx 50,000+ people die .
    The majority fortunately have had a good long life .
    Without seeming like a political vulture ,these are your older Unionist types.
    Unionism is literally dying out.

  36. Excellent and interesting article.
    Although no economist myself the arguments you put forward for a Scottish £ sound logical enough to me.

    One ommission in your article is EU or out of EU.

    Personally i would like us to adopt the same position as Norway.
    With 60% of Europes Oil reserves I anticipate little resistance from Brussels to us gaining favourable terms of trade without all the added burden and corruption of full membership.

    We could reclaim our fishing waters for our own fisherman,not trade their rights to protect City of London.
    Let us also not forget we are an exporter of food ,unlike UK.
    So the EU would pay attention to our requests for partial membership.

    One other point missed in Alex’s article is that it is in the older age group that there is the most resistance to Independence.
    The baby boomers are now hitting their 60s these were the vanguard of the SNP resurgence from 1967 ,Hamilton onwards.
    The campaigners from those days 19-25 yr olds are now 62-68yrs old.
    Each year in Scotland approx 50,000+ people die .
    The majority fortunately have had a good long life .
    Without seeming like a political vulture ,these are your older Unionist types.
    Unionism is literally dying out.

  37. Did I not read recently that some Westminster think tank guru, back at the start of the oil boom, reported from Whitehall that the “real resources from oil would make an Independent Scottish currency, one of the strongest in the world” ??? That was a danger to Westminster rule if ever there was one.
    It was also before the value to Scotland of world leading renewables technology, being developed here and now in Scotland, came into the picture. So I guess we are at least no worse off now than we were when oil was the only card in the energy pack.
    Then there is the excess value of reanewable energy which will be generated for ever by an independent Scotland.
    There are very obvious signs that neither Europe, nor the giant ecconomies of the world, are slow to realise these facts. For instance the “super energy grid” connecting into Scottish renewables, on the table for joint European development right now as we speak. Not only the rest of the UK will need this energy, but the whole of Europe need it badly.
    Then there is China, already investing here. “Keep your eye on China” as Gladstone might have said in todays world. (I worked for four years in China, and believe me they will lead a universal currency for replacement of the mighty dollar.) China are doing what China does, just waiting in the wings. The Euro has tried and failed to compete with the dollar, simply because the lawyer factoty calling itself the EU as a whole, has nothing to give the world. It’s value is in individual member countries. That is why Germany is starting to look after Germany now, and China is their target market. When the Euro splits, Germany will be in an even stronger position than it is now, because Germany is working on it right now.
    Scotland should be doing exactly the same thing with its own currency, and building an energy futures trust, which should invest and buy directly into international companies wanting to get in on our renewable boom. Look no further than Norway to see one way of how it can be done. (I also worked for ten years in Norway, again believe me, they are no “Fish heads”, as the Americans in the oil industry liked to call them.)
    Scotland needs to be in EFTA, not a full EU member. In the EU we would be under pressure to join the Euro and like the Norwegians have told the EU three when asked to vote on membership – “We are not lowering our standard of living to suit anyone”. Good for Norway, a poor wee country ???
    Aye, just like Scotland is ….. ask anyone in Whitehall.

    • Your first point of the power of the oil on the Scottish economy, when independent, are quite correct. Interestingly, this also touches on the currency subject.

      This was identified over thirty years ago in the [b]McCrone report[/b], prepared for Westminster, to examine the effects of Scottish oil, in light of demands (in the 70’s) for Scottish independence. This report was hidden, and classisifed as ‘secret’ by Westminster, only to be released a few years ago, due to some digging using the freedom of information legislation.

      On page 8, this is summed up quite neatly by the following passage in the McCrone report prepared for Westminster;

      QUOTE “[b][i]It must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps were taken either by carried interest or by taxation to secure the Government ‘take’. Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the Government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. Just as deposed monarchs and African leaders have in the past used the Swiss franc as a haven of security, so nowwould the Scottish pound be seen as a good hedge against inflation and devaluation and the Scottish banks could expect to find themselves inundated with a speculative inflow of foreign funds.[/i][/b]”

      The report can be downloaded here;

      http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccronereport.pdf

    • Your first point of the power of the oil on the Scottish economy, when independent, are quite correct. Interestingly, this also touches on the currency subject.

      This was identified over thirty years ago in the [b]McCrone report[/b], prepared for Westminster, to examine the effects of Scottish oil, in light of demands (in the 70’s) for Scottish independence. This report was hidden, and classisifed as ‘secret’ by Westminster, only to be released a few years ago, due to some digging using the freedom of information legislation.

      On page 8, this is summed up quite neatly by the following passage in the McCrone report prepared for Westminster;

      QUOTE “[b][i]It must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps were taken either by carried interest or by taxation to secure the Government ‘take’. Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the Government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. Just as deposed monarchs and African leaders have in the past used the Swiss franc as a haven of security, so nowwould the Scottish pound be seen as a good hedge against inflation and devaluation and the Scottish banks could expect to find themselves inundated with a speculative inflow of foreign funds.[/i][/b]”

      The report can be downloaded here;

      http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccronereport.pdf

    • Your first point of the power of the oil on the Scottish economy, when independent, are quite correct. Interestingly, this also touches on the currency subject.

      This was identified over thirty years ago in the [b]McCrone report[/b], prepared for Westminster, to examine the effects of Scottish oil, in light of demands (in the 70’s) for Scottish independence. This report was hidden, and classisifed as ‘secret’ by Westminster, only to be released a few years ago, due to some digging using the freedom of information legislation.

      On page 8, this is summed up quite neatly by the following passage in the McCrone report prepared for Westminster;

      QUOTE “[b][i]It must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps were taken either by carried interest or by taxation to secure the Government ‘take’. Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the Government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. Just as deposed monarchs and African leaders have in the past used the Swiss franc as a haven of security, so nowwould the Scottish pound be seen as a good hedge against inflation and devaluation and the Scottish banks could expect to find themselves inundated with a speculative inflow of foreign funds.[/i][/b]”

      The report can be downloaded here;

      http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccronereport.pdf

    • Your first point of the power of the oil on the Scottish economy, when independent, are quite correct. Interestingly, this also touches on the currency subject.

      This was identified over thirty years ago in the [b]McCrone report[/b], prepared for Westminster, to examine the effects of Scottish oil, in light of demands (in the 70’s) for Scottish independence. This report was hidden, and classisifed as ‘secret’ by Westminster, only to be released a few years ago, due to some digging using the freedom of information legislation.

      On page 8, this is summed up quite neatly by the following passage in the McCrone report prepared for Westminster;

      QUOTE “[b][i]It must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps were taken either by carried interest or by taxation to secure the Government ‘take’. Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the Government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. Just as deposed monarchs and African leaders have in the past used the Swiss franc as a haven of security, so nowwould the Scottish pound be seen as a good hedge against inflation and devaluation and the Scottish banks could expect to find themselves inundated with a speculative inflow of foreign funds.[/i][/b]”

      The report can be downloaded here;

      http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccronereport.pdf

    • Your first point of the power of the oil on the Scottish economy, when independent, are quite correct. Interestingly, this also touches on the currency subject.

      This was identified over thirty years ago in the [b]McCrone report[/b], prepared for Westminster, to examine the effects of Scottish oil, in light of demands (in the 70’s) for Scottish independence. This report was hidden, and classisifed as ‘secret’ by Westminster, only to be released a few years ago, due to some digging using the freedom of information legislation.

      On page 8, this is summed up quite neatly by the following passage in the McCrone report prepared for Westminster;

      QUOTE “[b][i]It must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps were taken either by carried interest or by taxation to secure the Government ‘take’. Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the Government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. Just as deposed monarchs and African leaders have in the past used the Swiss franc as a haven of security, so nowwould the Scottish pound be seen as a good hedge against inflation and devaluation and the Scottish banks could expect to find themselves inundated with a speculative inflow of foreign funds.[/i][/b]”

      The report can be downloaded here;

      http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccronereport.pdf

    • Your first point of the power of the oil on the Scottish economy, when independent, are quite correct. Interestingly, this also touches on the currency subject.

      This was identified over thirty years ago in the [b]McCrone report[/b], prepared for Westminster, to examine the effects of Scottish oil, in light of demands (in the 70’s) for Scottish independence. This report was hidden, and classisifed as ‘secret’ by Westminster, only to be released a few years ago, due to some digging using the freedom of information legislation.

      On page 8, this is summed up quite neatly by the following passage in the McCrone report prepared for Westminster;

      QUOTE “[b][i]It must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps were taken either by carried interest or by taxation to secure the Government ‘take’. Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the Government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. Just as deposed monarchs and African leaders have in the past used the Swiss franc as a haven of security, so nowwould the Scottish pound be seen as a good hedge against inflation and devaluation and the Scottish banks could expect to find themselves inundated with a speculative inflow of foreign funds.[/i][/b]”

      The report can be downloaded here;

      http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccronereport.pdf

  38. Did I not read recently that some Westminster think tank guru, back at the start of the oil boom, reported from Whitehall that the “real resources from oil would make an Independent Scottish currency, one of the strongest in the world” ??? That was a danger to Westminster rule if ever there was one.
    It was also before the value to Scotland of world leading renewables technology, being developed here and now in Scotland, came into the picture. So I guess we are at least no worse off now than we were when oil was the only card in the energy pack.
    Then there is the excess value of reanewable energy which will be generated for ever by an independent Scotland.
    There are very obvious signs that neither Europe, nor the giant ecconomies of the world, are slow to realise these facts. For instance the “super energy grid” connecting into Scottish renewables, on the table for joint European development right now as we speak. Not only the rest of the UK will need this energy, but the whole of Europe need it badly.
    Then there is China, already investing here. “Keep your eye on China” as Gladstone might have said in todays world. (I worked for four years in China, and believe me they will lead a universal currency for replacement of the mighty dollar.) China are doing what China does, just waiting in the wings. The Euro has tried and failed to compete with the dollar, simply because the lawyer factoty calling itself the EU as a whole, has nothing to give the world. It’s value is in individual member countries. That is why Germany is starting to look after Germany now, and China is their target market. When the Euro splits, Germany will be in an even stronger position than it is now, because Germany is working on it right now.
    Scotland should be doing exactly the same thing with its own currency, and building an energy futures trust, which should invest and buy directly into international companies wanting to get in on our renewable boom. Look no further than Norway to see one way of how it can be done. (I also worked for ten years in Norway, again believe me, they are no “Fish heads”, as the Americans in the oil industry liked to call them.)
    Scotland needs to be in EFTA, not a full EU member. In the EU we would be under pressure to join the Euro and like the Norwegians have told the EU three when asked to vote on membership – “We are not lowering our standard of living to suit anyone”. Good for Norway, a poor wee country ???
    Aye, just like Scotland is ….. ask anyone in Whitehall.

  39. Did I not read recently that some Westminster think tank guru, back at the start of the oil boom, reported from Whitehall that the “real resources from oil would make an Independent Scottish currency, one of the strongest in the world” ??? That was a danger to Westminster rule if ever there was one.
    It was also before the value to Scotland of world leading renewables technology, being developed here and now in Scotland, came into the picture. So I guess we are at least no worse off now than we were when oil was the only card in the energy pack.
    Then there is the excess value of reanewable energy which will be generated for ever by an independent Scotland.
    There are very obvious signs that neither Europe, nor the giant ecconomies of the world, are slow to realise these facts. For instance the “super energy grid” connecting into Scottish renewables, on the table for joint European development right now as we speak. Not only the rest of the UK will need this energy, but the whole of Europe need it badly.
    Then there is China, already investing here. “Keep your eye on China” as Gladstone might have said in todays world. (I worked for four years in China, and believe me they will lead a universal currency for replacement of the mighty dollar.) China are doing what China does, just waiting in the wings. The Euro has tried and failed to compete with the dollar, simply because the lawyer factoty calling itself the EU as a whole, has nothing to give the world. It’s value is in individual member countries. That is why Germany is starting to look after Germany now, and China is their target market. When the Euro splits, Germany will be in an even stronger position than it is now, because Germany is working on it right now.
    Scotland should be doing exactly the same thing with its own currency, and building an energy futures trust, which should invest and buy directly into international companies wanting to get in on our renewable boom. Look no further than Norway to see one way of how it can be done. (I also worked for ten years in Norway, again believe me, they are no “Fish heads”, as the Americans in the oil industry liked to call them.)
    Scotland needs to be in EFTA, not a full EU member. In the EU we would be under pressure to join the Euro and like the Norwegians have told the EU three when asked to vote on membership – “We are not lowering our standard of living to suit anyone”. Good for Norway, a poor wee country ???
    Aye, just like Scotland is ….. ask anyone in Whitehall.

  40. Did I not read recently that some Westminster think tank guru, back at the start of the oil boom, reported from Whitehall that the “real resources from oil would make an Independent Scottish currency, one of the strongest in the world” ??? That was a danger to Westminster rule if ever there was one.
    It was also before the value to Scotland of world leading renewables technology, being developed here and now in Scotland, came into the picture. So I guess we are at least no worse off now than we were when oil was the only card in the energy pack.
    Then there is the excess value of reanewable energy which will be generated for ever by an independent Scotland.
    There are very obvious signs that neither Europe, nor the giant ecconomies of the world, are slow to realise these facts. For instance the “super energy grid” connecting into Scottish renewables, on the table for joint European development right now as we speak. Not only the rest of the UK will need this energy, but the whole of Europe need it badly.
    Then there is China, already investing here. “Keep your eye on China” as Gladstone might have said in todays world. (I worked for four years in China, and believe me they will lead a universal currency for replacement of the mighty dollar.) China are doing what China does, just waiting in the wings. The Euro has tried and failed to compete with the dollar, simply because the lawyer factoty calling itself the EU as a whole, has nothing to give the world. It’s value is in individual member countries. That is why Germany is starting to look after Germany now, and China is their target market. When the Euro splits, Germany will be in an even stronger position than it is now, because Germany is working on it right now.
    Scotland should be doing exactly the same thing with its own currency, and building an energy futures trust, which should invest and buy directly into international companies wanting to get in on our renewable boom. Look no further than Norway to see one way of how it can be done. (I also worked for ten years in Norway, again believe me, they are no “Fish heads”, as the Americans in the oil industry liked to call them.)
    Scotland needs to be in EFTA, not a full EU member. In the EU we would be under pressure to join the Euro and like the Norwegians have told the EU three when asked to vote on membership – “We are not lowering our standard of living to suit anyone”. Good for Norway, a poor wee country ???
    Aye, just like Scotland is ….. ask anyone in Whitehall.

  41. Did I not read recently that some Westminster think tank guru, back at the start of the oil boom, reported from Whitehall that the “real resources from oil would make an Independent Scottish currency, one of the strongest in the world” ??? That was a danger to Westminster rule if ever there was one.
    It was also before the value to Scotland of world leading renewables technology, being developed here and now in Scotland, came into the picture. So I guess we are at least no worse off now than we were when oil was the only card in the energy pack.
    Then there is the excess value of reanewable energy which will be generated for ever by an independent Scotland.
    There are very obvious signs that neither Europe, nor the giant ecconomies of the world, are slow to realise these facts. For instance the “super energy grid” connecting into Scottish renewables, on the table for joint European development right now as we speak. Not only the rest of the UK will need this energy, but the whole of Europe need it badly.
    Then there is China, already investing here. “Keep your eye on China” as Gladstone might have said in todays world. (I worked for four years in China, and believe me they will lead a universal currency for replacement of the mighty dollar.) China are doing what China does, just waiting in the wings. The Euro has tried and failed to compete with the dollar, simply because the lawyer factoty calling itself the EU as a whole, has nothing to give the world. It’s value is in individual member countries. That is why Germany is starting to look after Germany now, and China is their target market. When the Euro splits, Germany will be in an even stronger position than it is now, because Germany is working on it right now.
    Scotland should be doing exactly the same thing with its own currency, and building an energy futures trust, which should invest and buy directly into international companies wanting to get in on our renewable boom. Look no further than Norway to see one way of how it can be done. (I also worked for ten years in Norway, again believe me, they are no “Fish heads”, as the Americans in the oil industry liked to call them.)
    Scotland needs to be in EFTA, not a full EU member. In the EU we would be under pressure to join the Euro and like the Norwegians have told the EU three when asked to vote on membership – “We are not lowering our standard of living to suit anyone”. Good for Norway, a poor wee country ???
    Aye, just like Scotland is ….. ask anyone in Whitehall.

  42. Did I not read recently that some Westminster think tank guru, back at the start of the oil boom, reported from Whitehall that the “real resources from oil would make an Independent Scottish currency, one of the strongest in the world” ??? That was a danger to Westminster rule if ever there was one.
    It was also before the value to Scotland of world leading renewables technology, being developed here and now in Scotland, came into the picture. So I guess we are at least no worse off now than we were when oil was the only card in the energy pack.
    Then there is the excess value of reanewable energy which will be generated for ever by an independent Scotland.
    There are very obvious signs that neither Europe, nor the giant ecconomies of the world, are slow to realise these facts. For instance the “super energy grid” connecting into Scottish renewables, on the table for joint European development right now as we speak. Not only the rest of the UK will need this energy, but the whole of Europe need it badly.
    Then there is China, already investing here. “Keep your eye on China” as Gladstone might have said in todays world. (I worked for four years in China, and believe me they will lead a universal currency for replacement of the mighty dollar.) China are doing what China does, just waiting in the wings. The Euro has tried and failed to compete with the dollar, simply because the lawyer factoty calling itself the EU as a whole, has nothing to give the world. It’s value is in individual member countries. That is why Germany is starting to look after Germany now, and China is their target market. When the Euro splits, Germany will be in an even stronger position than it is now, because Germany is working on it right now.
    Scotland should be doing exactly the same thing with its own currency, and building an energy futures trust, which should invest and buy directly into international companies wanting to get in on our renewable boom. Look no further than Norway to see one way of how it can be done. (I also worked for ten years in Norway, again believe me, they are no “Fish heads”, as the Americans in the oil industry liked to call them.)
    Scotland needs to be in EFTA, not a full EU member. In the EU we would be under pressure to join the Euro and like the Norwegians have told the EU three when asked to vote on membership – “We are not lowering our standard of living to suit anyone”. Good for Norway, a poor wee country ???
    Aye, just like Scotland is ….. ask anyone in Whitehall.

  43. In all the arguments, oil, economy, whatever, one item seems to be missing, and to me it is the most fundamental. If the worst came to the worst, and the UK went broke, Scotland could continue to feed itself. Granted we would not dine on bananas or caviar, these being expensive imports, but neither would we starve. Surely the fact that, unlike England, we can feed ourselves, is the basis for all arguments on economic viability.
    As long as we can do that, oor jaikets are quite secure.

  44. In all the arguments, oil, economy, whatever, one item seems to be missing, and to me it is the most fundamental. If the worst came to the worst, and the UK went broke, Scotland could continue to feed itself. Granted we would not dine on bananas or caviar, these being expensive imports, but neither would we starve. Surely the fact that, unlike England, we can feed ourselves, is the basis for all arguments on economic viability.
    As long as we can do that, oor jaikets are quite secure.

  45. In all the arguments, oil, economy, whatever, one item seems to be missing, and to me it is the most fundamental. If the worst came to the worst, and the UK went broke, Scotland could continue to feed itself. Granted we would not dine on bananas or caviar, these being expensive imports, but neither would we starve. Surely the fact that, unlike England, we can feed ourselves, is the basis for all arguments on economic viability.
    As long as we can do that, oor jaikets are quite secure.

  46. In all the arguments, oil, economy, whatever, one item seems to be missing, and to me it is the most fundamental. If the worst came to the worst, and the UK went broke, Scotland could continue to feed itself. Granted we would not dine on bananas or caviar, these being expensive imports, but neither would we starve. Surely the fact that, unlike England, we can feed ourselves, is the basis for all arguments on economic viability.
    As long as we can do that, oor jaikets are quite secure.

  47. In all the arguments, oil, economy, whatever, one item seems to be missing, and to me it is the most fundamental. If the worst came to the worst, and the UK went broke, Scotland could continue to feed itself. Granted we would not dine on bananas or caviar, these being expensive imports, but neither would we starve. Surely the fact that, unlike England, we can feed ourselves, is the basis for all arguments on economic viability.
    As long as we can do that, oor jaikets are quite secure.

  48. In all the arguments, oil, economy, whatever, one item seems to be missing, and to me it is the most fundamental. If the worst came to the worst, and the UK went broke, Scotland could continue to feed itself. Granted we would not dine on bananas or caviar, these being expensive imports, but neither would we starve. Surely the fact that, unlike England, we can feed ourselves, is the basis for all arguments on economic viability.
    As long as we can do that, oor jaikets are quite secure.

  49. Good article and some excellent comments above. My main concern has been the currency question and I think others have expressed this too. Speculators will be getting ready to pounce(they work short and long term)and I think we need to be linked hard to the Euro or adopt the Euro. We do not want to float on sterling as this is going to go into freefall despite the arguements from whitehall that they subsidise the Scots

  50. Good article and some excellent comments above. My main concern has been the currency question and I think others have expressed this too. Speculators will be getting ready to pounce(they work short and long term)and I think we need to be linked hard to the Euro or adopt the Euro. We do not want to float on sterling as this is going to go into freefall despite the arguements from whitehall that they subsidise the Scots

  51. Good article and some excellent comments above. My main concern has been the currency question and I think others have expressed this too. Speculators will be getting ready to pounce(they work short and long term)and I think we need to be linked hard to the Euro or adopt the Euro. We do not want to float on sterling as this is going to go into freefall despite the arguements from whitehall that they subsidise the Scots

  52. Good article and some excellent comments above. My main concern has been the currency question and I think others have expressed this too. Speculators will be getting ready to pounce(they work short and long term)and I think we need to be linked hard to the Euro or adopt the Euro. We do not want to float on sterling as this is going to go into freefall despite the arguements from whitehall that they subsidise the Scots

  53. Good article and some excellent comments above. My main concern has been the currency question and I think others have expressed this too. Speculators will be getting ready to pounce(they work short and long term)and I think we need to be linked hard to the Euro or adopt the Euro. We do not want to float on sterling as this is going to go into freefall despite the arguements from whitehall that they subsidise the Scots

  54. Good article and some excellent comments above. My main concern has been the currency question and I think others have expressed this too. Speculators will be getting ready to pounce(they work short and long term)and I think we need to be linked hard to the Euro or adopt the Euro. We do not want to float on sterling as this is going to go into freefall despite the arguements from whitehall that they subsidise the Scots

  55. Remember McCrone said that an independant Scotland could have a surplus to an embarassing extent and a currency perhaps only second to Norway (a country we should build better relations with, rather than hangin on to England in the hope of more dole money) in terms of strength. Imagine the years of inward investment that could have triggerd compared to the years of decay were we became the sick man of Europe. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. We were shy in voting for a scottish parliament, I sincerely hope people wake up fast to the facts that have been denied to us for so long. A separate competative currency would lead us to a wealthier Scotland which can pay its debts off quicker than the rates we do now as we are dragged down by an oil wealth that is diluted across England. Yet we are still told we cannot afford to leave the union? We can’t afford to stay in it anymore!

  56. Remember McCrone said that an independant Scotland could have a surplus to an embarassing extent and a currency perhaps only second to Norway (a country we should build better relations with, rather than hangin on to England in the hope of more dole money) in terms of strength. Imagine the years of inward investment that could have triggerd compared to the years of decay were we became the sick man of Europe. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. We were shy in voting for a scottish parliament, I sincerely hope people wake up fast to the facts that have been denied to us for so long. A separate competative currency would lead us to a wealthier Scotland which can pay its debts off quicker than the rates we do now as we are dragged down by an oil wealth that is diluted across England. Yet we are still told we cannot afford to leave the union? We can’t afford to stay in it anymore!

  57. Remember McCrone said that an independant Scotland could have a surplus to an embarassing extent and a currency perhaps only second to Norway (a country we should build better relations with, rather than hangin on to England in the hope of more dole money) in terms of strength. Imagine the years of inward investment that could have triggerd compared to the years of decay were we became the sick man of Europe. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. We were shy in voting for a scottish parliament, I sincerely hope people wake up fast to the facts that have been denied to us for so long. A separate competative currency would lead us to a wealthier Scotland which can pay its debts off quicker than the rates we do now as we are dragged down by an oil wealth that is diluted across England. Yet we are still told we cannot afford to leave the union? We can’t afford to stay in it anymore!

  58. Remember McCrone said that an independant Scotland could have a surplus to an embarassing extent and a currency perhaps only second to Norway (a country we should build better relations with, rather than hangin on to England in the hope of more dole money) in terms of strength. Imagine the years of inward investment that could have triggerd compared to the years of decay were we became the sick man of Europe. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. We were shy in voting for a scottish parliament, I sincerely hope people wake up fast to the facts that have been denied to us for so long. A separate competative currency would lead us to a wealthier Scotland which can pay its debts off quicker than the rates we do now as we are dragged down by an oil wealth that is diluted across England. Yet we are still told we cannot afford to leave the union? We can’t afford to stay in it anymore!

  59. Remember McCrone said that an independant Scotland could have a surplus to an embarassing extent and a currency perhaps only second to Norway (a country we should build better relations with, rather than hangin on to England in the hope of more dole money) in terms of strength. Imagine the years of inward investment that could have triggerd compared to the years of decay were we became the sick man of Europe. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. We were shy in voting for a scottish parliament, I sincerely hope people wake up fast to the facts that have been denied to us for so long. A separate competative currency would lead us to a wealthier Scotland which can pay its debts off quicker than the rates we do now as we are dragged down by an oil wealth that is diluted across England. Yet we are still told we cannot afford to leave the union? We can’t afford to stay in it anymore!

  60. Remember McCrone said that an independant Scotland could have a surplus to an embarassing extent and a currency perhaps only second to Norway (a country we should build better relations with, rather than hangin on to England in the hope of more dole money) in terms of strength. Imagine the years of inward investment that could have triggerd compared to the years of decay were we became the sick man of Europe. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past. We were shy in voting for a scottish parliament, I sincerely hope people wake up fast to the facts that have been denied to us for so long. A separate competative currency would lead us to a wealthier Scotland which can pay its debts off quicker than the rates we do now as we are dragged down by an oil wealth that is diluted across England. Yet we are still told we cannot afford to leave the union? We can’t afford to stay in it anymore!

  61. Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
    The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
    To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
    Stand by for very dirty tricks.

    • [quote name=”Harrbrian”]Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
      The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
      To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
      Stand by for very dirty tricks.[/quote]

      Great article, once more Alex five star work.

      What I have picked up on, Harrbrian is the rhetoric from people like @McLetchy has changed because even he, of the supercilious sneering tone, who defrauded the public purse, recognises that the @Unionist lies of old are just that. Even they are tired of endlessly patronising Scots, and our campaign of enlightenment is now breaking though in a big way, thanks to people like Alex and many others. In that old organ of Unionism the English Owned @Daily Record the comments section is full of pro Scottish independence comments as the Britnats get thrashed soundly every day.

      The @BBCs English owned @Blether with Brian has given up trying to censor the pro independence message, as to a certain extent the asylum that is the English owned @Scotsman. On there the Britnat trolls have to change their monikers every 10 minutes now as they are thrashed and trashed on every argument. I for my part am very proud to be called a @Cybernat, I do my bit when time and health allows. And there are many like me.

      So @Cybernats the message is getting through the young bloods are up for it, and we veterans must encourage them as if we cannot carry the youth vote we are sunk, but we know we are not.

      What I started of to say, and got carried away a wee bit is that the likes of @McLethcy and co, are now adopting the @Cathy Jameson school of propaganda and bottom guff, now apparently independence is not going to be possible because “these things are very very very very very very difficult.” When that is said I do not know whether to laugh or cry, it is just so juvenile and patronising. No one is pretending that some things are going to be complicated, that is why we voted in the most competent team to take care of it. There are very few bureaucrats or politicians who will get one past @Alex Salmond and his team. The treasury as we have already seen will bend over backwards to make these negotiations as tricky as they can, all they are doing is cutting their noses of to spite their faces, which are many.

      PS @First Minister I noticed on @STVs The Hour show, that you said you never have breakfast. I know you are an avid reader of my work so listen: [b]Please employ a dietician ASAP.[/b] Moira will be with you all the way, as she will see the benefit of a slimmer fitter you, stay of the curries. breakfast is the most important meal of the day, in your case especially. It has been shown time and again.

      Breakfast is ‘most important meal’
      Some foods may have greater health benefits
      Eating breakfast is the secret to staying healthy, according to evidence unearthed by doctors in the US.

      They believe skipping the first meal of the day increases the chances of becoming obese, developing diabetes or even having a heart attack.

      Their study found that people who eat whole-grain cereals every morning are among those most likely to see the health benefits.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2824987.stm

      http://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/?p=1525

      We need you fighting fit Alex not taking meds and having heart surgery, please look after your self better. I’m not saying you are fat, but you are looking rather…’comfortable.’ You know it makes sense, just do it. You can still have a curry blow out every now and then, and you will appreciate it more.

    • [quote name=”Harrbrian”]Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
      The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
      To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
      Stand by for very dirty tricks.[/quote]

      Great article, once more Alex five star work.

      What I have picked up on, Harrbrian is the rhetoric from people like @McLetchy has changed because even he, of the supercilious sneering tone, who defrauded the public purse, recognises that the @Unionist lies of old are just that. Even they are tired of endlessly patronising Scots, and our campaign of enlightenment is now breaking though in a big way, thanks to people like Alex and many others. In that old organ of Unionism the English Owned @Daily Record the comments section is full of pro Scottish independence comments as the Britnats get thrashed soundly every day.

      The @BBCs English owned @Blether with Brian has given up trying to censor the pro independence message, as to a certain extent the asylum that is the English owned @Scotsman. On there the Britnat trolls have to change their monikers every 10 minutes now as they are thrashed and trashed on every argument. I for my part am very proud to be called a @Cybernat, I do my bit when time and health allows. And there are many like me.

      So @Cybernats the message is getting through the young bloods are up for it, and we veterans must encourage them as if we cannot carry the youth vote we are sunk, but we know we are not.

      What I started of to say, and got carried away a wee bit is that the likes of @McLethcy and co, are now adopting the @Cathy Jameson school of propaganda and bottom guff, now apparently independence is not going to be possible because “these things are very very very very very very difficult.” When that is said I do not know whether to laugh or cry, it is just so juvenile and patronising. No one is pretending that some things are going to be complicated, that is why we voted in the most competent team to take care of it. There are very few bureaucrats or politicians who will get one past @Alex Salmond and his team. The treasury as we have already seen will bend over backwards to make these negotiations as tricky as they can, all they are doing is cutting their noses of to spite their faces, which are many.

      PS @First Minister I noticed on @STVs The Hour show, that you said you never have breakfast. I know you are an avid reader of my work so listen: [b]Please employ a dietician ASAP.[/b] Moira will be with you all the way, as she will see the benefit of a slimmer fitter you, stay of the curries. breakfast is the most important meal of the day, in your case especially. It has been shown time and again.

      Breakfast is ‘most important meal’
      Some foods may have greater health benefits
      Eating breakfast is the secret to staying healthy, according to evidence unearthed by doctors in the US.

      They believe skipping the first meal of the day increases the chances of becoming obese, developing diabetes or even having a heart attack.

      Their study found that people who eat whole-grain cereals every morning are among those most likely to see the health benefits.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2824987.stm

      http://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/?p=1525

      We need you fighting fit Alex not taking meds and having heart surgery, please look after your self better. I’m not saying you are fat, but you are looking rather…’comfortable.’ You know it makes sense, just do it. You can still have a curry blow out every now and then, and you will appreciate it more.

    • [quote name=”Harrbrian”]Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
      The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
      To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
      Stand by for very dirty tricks.[/quote]

      Great article, once more Alex five star work.

      What I have picked up on, Harrbrian is the rhetoric from people like @McLetchy has changed because even he, of the supercilious sneering tone, who defrauded the public purse, recognises that the @Unionist lies of old are just that. Even they are tired of endlessly patronising Scots, and our campaign of enlightenment is now breaking though in a big way, thanks to people like Alex and many others. In that old organ of Unionism the English Owned @Daily Record the comments section is full of pro Scottish independence comments as the Britnats get thrashed soundly every day.

      The @BBCs English owned @Blether with Brian has given up trying to censor the pro independence message, as to a certain extent the asylum that is the English owned @Scotsman. On there the Britnat trolls have to change their monikers every 10 minutes now as they are thrashed and trashed on every argument. I for my part am very proud to be called a @Cybernat, I do my bit when time and health allows. And there are many like me.

      So @Cybernats the message is getting through the young bloods are up for it, and we veterans must encourage them as if we cannot carry the youth vote we are sunk, but we know we are not.

      What I started of to say, and got carried away a wee bit is that the likes of @McLethcy and co, are now adopting the @Cathy Jameson school of propaganda and bottom guff, now apparently independence is not going to be possible because “these things are very very very very very very difficult.” When that is said I do not know whether to laugh or cry, it is just so juvenile and patronising. No one is pretending that some things are going to be complicated, that is why we voted in the most competent team to take care of it. There are very few bureaucrats or politicians who will get one past @Alex Salmond and his team. The treasury as we have already seen will bend over backwards to make these negotiations as tricky as they can, all they are doing is cutting their noses of to spite their faces, which are many.

      PS @First Minister I noticed on @STVs The Hour show, that you said you never have breakfast. I know you are an avid reader of my work so listen: [b]Please employ a dietician ASAP.[/b] Moira will be with you all the way, as she will see the benefit of a slimmer fitter you, stay of the curries. breakfast is the most important meal of the day, in your case especially. It has been shown time and again.

      Breakfast is ‘most important meal’
      Some foods may have greater health benefits
      Eating breakfast is the secret to staying healthy, according to evidence unearthed by doctors in the US.

      They believe skipping the first meal of the day increases the chances of becoming obese, developing diabetes or even having a heart attack.

      Their study found that people who eat whole-grain cereals every morning are among those most likely to see the health benefits.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2824987.stm

      http://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/?p=1525

      We need you fighting fit Alex not taking meds and having heart surgery, please look after your self better. I’m not saying you are fat, but you are looking rather…’comfortable.’ You know it makes sense, just do it. You can still have a curry blow out every now and then, and you will appreciate it more.

    • [quote name=”Harrbrian”]Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
      The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
      To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
      Stand by for very dirty tricks.[/quote]

      Great article, once more Alex five star work.

      What I have picked up on, Harrbrian is the rhetoric from people like @McLetchy has changed because even he, of the supercilious sneering tone, who defrauded the public purse, recognises that the @Unionist lies of old are just that. Even they are tired of endlessly patronising Scots, and our campaign of enlightenment is now breaking though in a big way, thanks to people like Alex and many others. In that old organ of Unionism the English Owned @Daily Record the comments section is full of pro Scottish independence comments as the Britnats get thrashed soundly every day.

      The @BBCs English owned @Blether with Brian has given up trying to censor the pro independence message, as to a certain extent the asylum that is the English owned @Scotsman. On there the Britnat trolls have to change their monikers every 10 minutes now as they are thrashed and trashed on every argument. I for my part am very proud to be called a @Cybernat, I do my bit when time and health allows. And there are many like me.

      So @Cybernats the message is getting through the young bloods are up for it, and we veterans must encourage them as if we cannot carry the youth vote we are sunk, but we know we are not.

      What I started of to say, and got carried away a wee bit is that the likes of @McLethcy and co, are now adopting the @Cathy Jameson school of propaganda and bottom guff, now apparently independence is not going to be possible because “these things are very very very very very very difficult.” When that is said I do not know whether to laugh or cry, it is just so juvenile and patronising. No one is pretending that some things are going to be complicated, that is why we voted in the most competent team to take care of it. There are very few bureaucrats or politicians who will get one past @Alex Salmond and his team. The treasury as we have already seen will bend over backwards to make these negotiations as tricky as they can, all they are doing is cutting their noses of to spite their faces, which are many.

      PS @First Minister I noticed on @STVs The Hour show, that you said you never have breakfast. I know you are an avid reader of my work so listen: [b]Please employ a dietician ASAP.[/b] Moira will be with you all the way, as she will see the benefit of a slimmer fitter you, stay of the curries. breakfast is the most important meal of the day, in your case especially. It has been shown time and again.

      Breakfast is ‘most important meal’
      Some foods may have greater health benefits
      Eating breakfast is the secret to staying healthy, according to evidence unearthed by doctors in the US.

      They believe skipping the first meal of the day increases the chances of becoming obese, developing diabetes or even having a heart attack.

      Their study found that people who eat whole-grain cereals every morning are among those most likely to see the health benefits.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2824987.stm

      http://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/?p=1525

      We need you fighting fit Alex not taking meds and having heart surgery, please look after your self better. I’m not saying you are fat, but you are looking rather…’comfortable.’ You know it makes sense, just do it. You can still have a curry blow out every now and then, and you will appreciate it more.

    • [quote name=”Harrbrian”]Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
      The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
      To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
      Stand by for very dirty tricks.[/quote]

      Great article, once more Alex five star work.

      What I have picked up on, Harrbrian is the rhetoric from people like @McLetchy has changed because even he, of the supercilious sneering tone, who defrauded the public purse, recognises that the @Unionist lies of old are just that. Even they are tired of endlessly patronising Scots, and our campaign of enlightenment is now breaking though in a big way, thanks to people like Alex and many others. In that old organ of Unionism the English Owned @Daily Record the comments section is full of pro Scottish independence comments as the Britnats get thrashed soundly every day.

      The @BBCs English owned @Blether with Brian has given up trying to censor the pro independence message, as to a certain extent the asylum that is the English owned @Scotsman. On there the Britnat trolls have to change their monikers every 10 minutes now as they are thrashed and trashed on every argument. I for my part am very proud to be called a @Cybernat, I do my bit when time and health allows. And there are many like me.

      So @Cybernats the message is getting through the young bloods are up for it, and we veterans must encourage them as if we cannot carry the youth vote we are sunk, but we know we are not.

      What I started of to say, and got carried away a wee bit is that the likes of @McLethcy and co, are now adopting the @Cathy Jameson school of propaganda and bottom guff, now apparently independence is not going to be possible because “these things are very very very very very very difficult.” When that is said I do not know whether to laugh or cry, it is just so juvenile and patronising. No one is pretending that some things are going to be complicated, that is why we voted in the most competent team to take care of it. There are very few bureaucrats or politicians who will get one past @Alex Salmond and his team. The treasury as we have already seen will bend over backwards to make these negotiations as tricky as they can, all they are doing is cutting their noses of to spite their faces, which are many.

      PS @First Minister I noticed on @STVs The Hour show, that you said you never have breakfast. I know you are an avid reader of my work so listen: [b]Please employ a dietician ASAP.[/b] Moira will be with you all the way, as she will see the benefit of a slimmer fitter you, stay of the curries. breakfast is the most important meal of the day, in your case especially. It has been shown time and again.

      Breakfast is ‘most important meal’
      Some foods may have greater health benefits
      Eating breakfast is the secret to staying healthy, according to evidence unearthed by doctors in the US.

      They believe skipping the first meal of the day increases the chances of becoming obese, developing diabetes or even having a heart attack.

      Their study found that people who eat whole-grain cereals every morning are among those most likely to see the health benefits.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2824987.stm

      http://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/?p=1525

      We need you fighting fit Alex not taking meds and having heart surgery, please look after your self better. I’m not saying you are fat, but you are looking rather…’comfortable.’ You know it makes sense, just do it. You can still have a curry blow out every now and then, and you will appreciate it more.

    • [quote name=”Harrbrian”]Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
      The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
      To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
      Stand by for very dirty tricks.[/quote]

      Great article, once more Alex five star work.

      What I have picked up on, Harrbrian is the rhetoric from people like @McLetchy has changed because even he, of the supercilious sneering tone, who defrauded the public purse, recognises that the @Unionist lies of old are just that. Even they are tired of endlessly patronising Scots, and our campaign of enlightenment is now breaking though in a big way, thanks to people like Alex and many others. In that old organ of Unionism the English Owned @Daily Record the comments section is full of pro Scottish independence comments as the Britnats get thrashed soundly every day.

      The @BBCs English owned @Blether with Brian has given up trying to censor the pro independence message, as to a certain extent the asylum that is the English owned @Scotsman. On there the Britnat trolls have to change their monikers every 10 minutes now as they are thrashed and trashed on every argument. I for my part am very proud to be called a @Cybernat, I do my bit when time and health allows. And there are many like me.

      So @Cybernats the message is getting through the young bloods are up for it, and we veterans must encourage them as if we cannot carry the youth vote we are sunk, but we know we are not.

      What I started of to say, and got carried away a wee bit is that the likes of @McLethcy and co, are now adopting the @Cathy Jameson school of propaganda and bottom guff, now apparently independence is not going to be possible because “these things are very very very very very very difficult.” When that is said I do not know whether to laugh or cry, it is just so juvenile and patronising. No one is pretending that some things are going to be complicated, that is why we voted in the most competent team to take care of it. There are very few bureaucrats or politicians who will get one past @Alex Salmond and his team. The treasury as we have already seen will bend over backwards to make these negotiations as tricky as they can, all they are doing is cutting their noses of to spite their faces, which are many.

      PS @First Minister I noticed on @STVs The Hour show, that you said you never have breakfast. I know you are an avid reader of my work so listen: [b]Please employ a dietician ASAP.[/b] Moira will be with you all the way, as she will see the benefit of a slimmer fitter you, stay of the curries. breakfast is the most important meal of the day, in your case especially. It has been shown time and again.

      Breakfast is ‘most important meal’
      Some foods may have greater health benefits
      Eating breakfast is the secret to staying healthy, according to evidence unearthed by doctors in the US.

      They believe skipping the first meal of the day increases the chances of becoming obese, developing diabetes or even having a heart attack.

      Their study found that people who eat whole-grain cereals every morning are among those most likely to see the health benefits.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2824987.stm

      http://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/?p=1525

      We need you fighting fit Alex not taking meds and having heart surgery, please look after your self better. I’m not saying you are fat, but you are looking rather…’comfortable.’ You know it makes sense, just do it. You can still have a curry blow out every now and then, and you will appreciate it more.

  62. Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
    The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
    To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
    Stand by for very dirty tricks.

  63. Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
    The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
    To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
    Stand by for very dirty tricks.

  64. Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
    The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
    To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
    Stand by for very dirty tricks.

  65. Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
    The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
    To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
    Stand by for very dirty tricks.

  66. Liked the article but would suggest a further point.
    The Westminster elite are now waking up the possibilty that the end of the UK is on the horizon, and with it all their pretensions to importance on the world stage. This elite’s sense of their specialnees and value is spread throughout the politiclal classes, media, literature etc, and they will not give it up easily.
    To win the independence vote a majority of people living in Scotland have continue to trust the SNP. The home counties elite have to undermine that trust.
    Stand by for very dirty tricks.

  67. I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
    The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.

    • [quote name=”UpSpake”]I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
      The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.[/quote]

      Surely if you have talents such as you claim you would have been better serving your country by sticking with a winning team, than doing a Dorothy and stalking of? Better in than out, as the actress said to the Bishop.

      I have every confidence in the SNP and especially John Swinney who may not be the most flamboyant of men but he is a steady safe hand on the tiller. Apart from that he is a thoroughly decent human being, a rare quality these days. The SNP have a very talented team to carry the flag for Scotland. They are taking the fight to the Treasury and the Treasury will loose.

    • [quote name=”UpSpake”]I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
      The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.[/quote]

      Surely if you have talents such as you claim you would have been better serving your country by sticking with a winning team, than doing a Dorothy and stalking of? Better in than out, as the actress said to the Bishop.

      I have every confidence in the SNP and especially John Swinney who may not be the most flamboyant of men but he is a steady safe hand on the tiller. Apart from that he is a thoroughly decent human being, a rare quality these days. The SNP have a very talented team to carry the flag for Scotland. They are taking the fight to the Treasury and the Treasury will loose.

    • [quote name=”UpSpake”]I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
      The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.[/quote]

      Surely if you have talents such as you claim you would have been better serving your country by sticking with a winning team, than doing a Dorothy and stalking of? Better in than out, as the actress said to the Bishop.

      I have every confidence in the SNP and especially John Swinney who may not be the most flamboyant of men but he is a steady safe hand on the tiller. Apart from that he is a thoroughly decent human being, a rare quality these days. The SNP have a very talented team to carry the flag for Scotland. They are taking the fight to the Treasury and the Treasury will loose.

    • [quote name=”UpSpake”]I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
      The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.[/quote]

      Surely if you have talents such as you claim you would have been better serving your country by sticking with a winning team, than doing a Dorothy and stalking of? Better in than out, as the actress said to the Bishop.

      I have every confidence in the SNP and especially John Swinney who may not be the most flamboyant of men but he is a steady safe hand on the tiller. Apart from that he is a thoroughly decent human being, a rare quality these days. The SNP have a very talented team to carry the flag for Scotland. They are taking the fight to the Treasury and the Treasury will loose.

    • [quote name=”UpSpake”]I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
      The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.[/quote]

      Surely if you have talents such as you claim you would have been better serving your country by sticking with a winning team, than doing a Dorothy and stalking of? Better in than out, as the actress said to the Bishop.

      I have every confidence in the SNP and especially John Swinney who may not be the most flamboyant of men but he is a steady safe hand on the tiller. Apart from that he is a thoroughly decent human being, a rare quality these days. The SNP have a very talented team to carry the flag for Scotland. They are taking the fight to the Treasury and the Treasury will loose.

    • [quote name=”UpSpake”]I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
      The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.[/quote]

      Surely if you have talents such as you claim you would have been better serving your country by sticking with a winning team, than doing a Dorothy and stalking of? Better in than out, as the actress said to the Bishop.

      I have every confidence in the SNP and especially John Swinney who may not be the most flamboyant of men but he is a steady safe hand on the tiller. Apart from that he is a thoroughly decent human being, a rare quality these days. The SNP have a very talented team to carry the flag for Scotland. They are taking the fight to the Treasury and the Treasury will loose.

  68. I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
    The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.

  69. I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
    The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.

  70. I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
    The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.

  71. I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
    The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.

  72. I am not at all surprised by Alex’s assertion that the SNP are loath to discuss the concept of a Scottish Currency. My experience with the SNP in other matters of fiscal and economic policy was nothing short of frustrating which was the principle reason I left them in 2001.
    The areguement for a Scottish independent currency and all that goes along with that is ably handled by the SDA. With the explosive recomendations of McCrone in the 70’s and the excellent analysis of Scotland’s fiscal position by Prof’s Hughes-Hallet and Scott, it is surprising that pragmatic politicians such as Salmond do not wake up to the postive benifits for Scotland in having it’s own currency, national bank, investment bank, mint oh, I could go on !.

  73. “Taken together these figures mean every year 3% of the voting population becomes instantly internet savvied”.

    That’s just plain incorrect. If you start with 100% of the population not internet-savvy, and 1.5% die off and 1.5% join at the lower end, you have 1.5% then internet-savvy. You can’t add the 2 figures together as that is effectively counting them twice. If you don’t believe me, try it with 50% – after 1 year you would have 100% of people online.

    • Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

      If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

      I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid

      • Alibi – It’s the old ‘6 pointer’ argument in football.

        The winner in an important game doesn’t get 6 points – only 3. But the rival team doesn’t get any points and in effect is deemed to have ‘lost’ 3 point – ergo 6 pointer.

        The same argument is true here – 1.5% added to the lower ages & 1.5% lost to the older. The difference is only 1.5% but the EFFECT is 3.0%

        • Only works if you assume there is a spread of internet saviness going from 100% at the new end and 0 at the old end (and an average of 50% interenet saviness). If you assume 50% internet saviness in the current population, then the rise in internet saviness in the whole population is 1.5% (51.5%), but the number of people with internet saviness is 3% higher (1.5 out of 50).

          John

        • Only works if you assume there is a spread of internet saviness going from 100% at the new end and 0 at the old end (and an average of 50% interenet saviness). If you assume 50% internet saviness in the current population, then the rise in internet saviness in the whole population is 1.5% (51.5%), but the number of people with internet saviness is 3% higher (1.5 out of 50).

          John

        • Only works if you assume there is a spread of internet saviness going from 100% at the new end and 0 at the old end (and an average of 50% interenet saviness). If you assume 50% internet saviness in the current population, then the rise in internet saviness in the whole population is 1.5% (51.5%), but the number of people with internet saviness is 3% higher (1.5 out of 50).

          John

        • Only works if you assume there is a spread of internet saviness going from 100% at the new end and 0 at the old end (and an average of 50% interenet saviness). If you assume 50% internet saviness in the current population, then the rise in internet saviness in the whole population is 1.5% (51.5%), but the number of people with internet saviness is 3% higher (1.5 out of 50).

          John

        • Only works if you assume there is a spread of internet saviness going from 100% at the new end and 0 at the old end (and an average of 50% interenet saviness). If you assume 50% internet saviness in the current population, then the rise in internet saviness in the whole population is 1.5% (51.5%), but the number of people with internet saviness is 3% higher (1.5 out of 50).

          John

        • Only works if you assume there is a spread of internet saviness going from 100% at the new end and 0 at the old end (and an average of 50% interenet saviness). If you assume 50% internet saviness in the current population, then the rise in internet saviness in the whole population is 1.5% (51.5%), but the number of people with internet saviness is 3% higher (1.5 out of 50).

          John

      • Alibi – It’s the old ‘6 pointer’ argument in football.

        The winner in an important game doesn’t get 6 points – only 3. But the rival team doesn’t get any points and in effect is deemed to have ‘lost’ 3 point – ergo 6 pointer.

        The same argument is true here – 1.5% added to the lower ages & 1.5% lost to the older. The difference is only 1.5% but the EFFECT is 3.0%

      • Alibi – It’s the old ‘6 pointer’ argument in football.

        The winner in an important game doesn’t get 6 points – only 3. But the rival team doesn’t get any points and in effect is deemed to have ‘lost’ 3 point – ergo 6 pointer.

        The same argument is true here – 1.5% added to the lower ages & 1.5% lost to the older. The difference is only 1.5% but the EFFECT is 3.0%

      • Alibi – It’s the old ‘6 pointer’ argument in football.

        The winner in an important game doesn’t get 6 points – only 3. But the rival team doesn’t get any points and in effect is deemed to have ‘lost’ 3 point – ergo 6 pointer.

        The same argument is true here – 1.5% added to the lower ages & 1.5% lost to the older. The difference is only 1.5% but the EFFECT is 3.0%

      • Alibi – It’s the old ‘6 pointer’ argument in football.

        The winner in an important game doesn’t get 6 points – only 3. But the rival team doesn’t get any points and in effect is deemed to have ‘lost’ 3 point – ergo 6 pointer.

        The same argument is true here – 1.5% added to the lower ages & 1.5% lost to the older. The difference is only 1.5% but the EFFECT is 3.0%

      • Alibi – It’s the old ‘6 pointer’ argument in football.

        The winner in an important game doesn’t get 6 points – only 3. But the rival team doesn’t get any points and in effect is deemed to have ‘lost’ 3 point – ergo 6 pointer.

        The same argument is true here – 1.5% added to the lower ages & 1.5% lost to the older. The difference is only 1.5% but the EFFECT is 3.0%

      • [quote name=”Dougie Douglas”]Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

        If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

        I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid[/quote]

        What I am picking up on also is that people who would pour scorn on the SNP previously are now saying that they are doing well and are not to keen on pouring that scorn out as they think it is not a good idea to be seen to be not cool or trendy. Incidentally “cool” is a word we used a lot in the 60s, so “da olds” have really been cool all along. People are turning on to the SNP as we speak.

      • [quote name=”Dougie Douglas”]Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

        If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

        I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid[/quote]

        What I am picking up on also is that people who would pour scorn on the SNP previously are now saying that they are doing well and are not to keen on pouring that scorn out as they think it is not a good idea to be seen to be not cool or trendy. Incidentally “cool” is a word we used a lot in the 60s, so “da olds” have really been cool all along. People are turning on to the SNP as we speak.

      • [quote name=”Dougie Douglas”]Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

        If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

        I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid[/quote]

        What I am picking up on also is that people who would pour scorn on the SNP previously are now saying that they are doing well and are not to keen on pouring that scorn out as they think it is not a good idea to be seen to be not cool or trendy. Incidentally “cool” is a word we used a lot in the 60s, so “da olds” have really been cool all along. People are turning on to the SNP as we speak.

      • [quote name=”Dougie Douglas”]Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

        If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

        I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid[/quote]

        What I am picking up on also is that people who would pour scorn on the SNP previously are now saying that they are doing well and are not to keen on pouring that scorn out as they think it is not a good idea to be seen to be not cool or trendy. Incidentally “cool” is a word we used a lot in the 60s, so “da olds” have really been cool all along. People are turning on to the SNP as we speak.

      • [quote name=”Dougie Douglas”]Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

        If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

        I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid[/quote]

        What I am picking up on also is that people who would pour scorn on the SNP previously are now saying that they are doing well and are not to keen on pouring that scorn out as they think it is not a good idea to be seen to be not cool or trendy. Incidentally “cool” is a word we used a lot in the 60s, so “da olds” have really been cool all along. People are turning on to the SNP as we speak.

      • [quote name=”Dougie Douglas”]Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

        If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

        I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid[/quote]

        What I am picking up on also is that people who would pour scorn on the SNP previously are now saying that they are doing well and are not to keen on pouring that scorn out as they think it is not a good idea to be seen to be not cool or trendy. Incidentally “cool” is a word we used a lot in the 60s, so “da olds” have really been cool all along. People are turning on to the SNP as we speak.

    • Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

      If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

      I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid

    • Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

      If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

      I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid

    • Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

      If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

      I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid

    • Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

      If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

      I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid

    • Hmm, not sure about that Alibi.

      If you have 100 people in a population, 1.5 die(un-web savvy), 1.5 join (very web savvy) there is a net 3% gain in the total web ‘savvy-ness’ of that sample. That is assuming that the others in the middle stay stationery – which they don’t.

      I would guestimate that the web savvyness of the population increases by far more than 3% a year – the point is very much true – the internet is transforming our society and the author is most probably understating the figures but his premise is solid

  74. “Taken together these figures mean every year 3% of the voting population becomes instantly internet savvied”.

    That’s just plain incorrect. If you start with 100% of the population not internet-savvy, and 1.5% die off and 1.5% join at the lower end, you have 1.5% then internet-savvy. You can’t add the 2 figures together as that is effectively counting them twice. If you don’t believe me, try it with 50% – after 1 year you would have 100% of people online.

  75. “Taken together these figures mean every year 3% of the voting population becomes instantly internet savvied”.

    That’s just plain incorrect. If you start with 100% of the population not internet-savvy, and 1.5% die off and 1.5% join at the lower end, you have 1.5% then internet-savvy. You can’t add the 2 figures together as that is effectively counting them twice. If you don’t believe me, try it with 50% – after 1 year you would have 100% of people online.

  76. “Taken together these figures mean every year 3% of the voting population becomes instantly internet savvied”.

    That’s just plain incorrect. If you start with 100% of the population not internet-savvy, and 1.5% die off and 1.5% join at the lower end, you have 1.5% then internet-savvy. You can’t add the 2 figures together as that is effectively counting them twice. If you don’t believe me, try it with 50% – after 1 year you would have 100% of people online.

  77. “Taken together these figures mean every year 3% of the voting population becomes instantly internet savvied”.

    That’s just plain incorrect. If you start with 100% of the population not internet-savvy, and 1.5% die off and 1.5% join at the lower end, you have 1.5% then internet-savvy. You can’t add the 2 figures together as that is effectively counting them twice. If you don’t believe me, try it with 50% – after 1 year you would have 100% of people online.

  78. “Taken together these figures mean every year 3% of the voting population becomes instantly internet savvied”.

    That’s just plain incorrect. If you start with 100% of the population not internet-savvy, and 1.5% die off and 1.5% join at the lower end, you have 1.5% then internet-savvy. You can’t add the 2 figures together as that is effectively counting them twice. If you don’t believe me, try it with 50% – after 1 year you would have 100% of people online.

  79. ***Good news – at last!!!***

    Newsnet has managed to get together some flexible donation options:

    [url]http://www.newsnetscotland.com/contact-us/donations.html[/url]

    I have just pledged a twenty quid a month – it’s worth every penny

  80. ***Good news – at last!!!***

    Newsnet has managed to get together some flexible donation options:

    [url]http://www.newsnetscotland.com/contact-us/donations.html[/url]

    I have just pledged a twenty quid a month – it’s worth every penny

  81. ***Good news – at last!!!***

    Newsnet has managed to get together some flexible donation options:

    [url]http://www.newsnetscotland.com/contact-us/donations.html[/url]

    I have just pledged a twenty quid a month – it’s worth every penny

  82. ***Good news – at last!!!***

    Newsnet has managed to get together some flexible donation options:

    [url]http://www.newsnetscotland.com/contact-us/donations.html[/url]

    I have just pledged a twenty quid a month – it’s worth every penny

  83. ***Good news – at last!!!***

    Newsnet has managed to get together some flexible donation options:

    [url]http://www.newsnetscotland.com/contact-us/donations.html[/url]

    I have just pledged a twenty quid a month – it’s worth every penny

  84. ***Good news – at last!!!***

    Newsnet has managed to get together some flexible donation options:

    [url]http://www.newsnetscotland.com/contact-us/donations.html[/url]

    I have just pledged a twenty quid a month – it’s worth every penny

  85. Excellent article.

    I would like to suggest the following:-

    Newsnet sets up a section of the web site dedicated to debating the matter of whether or not Scotland is a contributor or parasite regarding the UK’s finances and settle the matter once and for all.

    1) Take the Gers Report and set out the various detailed headings therein.

    2) Invite submissions as to the exact definition of what each item of income or expenditure consists. e.g. VAT – how much VAT is credited as Scottish Tax and how much VAT is actually paid by Scottish businesses and individuals.

    3) Once contributors have debated the above and agreed the relevant definitions submit detailed questions to government as to what figures to apply to each item using FOI if necessary.

    4) Update the figures annually and if possible produce figures for previous years.

    5) After agreeing on what the current balance is examine each item and define how it would be affected if Independence were to be achieved – again I put forward VAT as an example.

    Perhaps we could then have agreement as to whether or not Scotland is a parasite. At present Unionists say that we are parasites while those in favour of Independence say that we are net contributors but neither side ever gives a detailed justification of their case.

    • This thread at Motley Fool with questions to and answers from Niall Aslen might be of interest:-

      http://boards.fool.co.uk/scottish-democratic-alliance-12260969.aspx?sort=whole

      The questions were about this report:-

      [url]http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/article/13/The_Great_Deception_GERS_2005(2).pdf[/url]

      “Having read “The Great Deception” report from the above website, I find the author’s calculations less than rock-solid. To be fair he does raise some valid points however certain assumptions coupled with a fair number of typing and grammatical errors do not fill me with confidence. There is also the style of the document, it reads more like a blog posting than any kind of serious financial analysis*.”

      I would like you to tell me which calculations you find less than rock solid…..

      This article was written over 7 months and finalised in a hurry to meet the deadline of a month before the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections therefore there are some typo errors. As for grammar it should be noted that English is NOT my first language. Gaidhlig (Gaelic) is my mother tongue and I was forced to learn English at School when I was 4 years old at a time when the British Government were following the policy of eradicating Gaelic and Welsh. (It failed miserably as an attempt at cultural genocide.) Even though I speak English quite well I still find it to be a crude language which is difficult to learn and whose rules of Grammar fall far short of what is desired.

      Also it should be noted that I am an Accountant in public practice and I put my personal reputation on the line when I published this paper. The response from the Labour party was to threaten newspaper editors and their owners with sanctions such as withdrawal of advertising revenues, if they printed or commented on my paper. Then I was investigated by the treasury who were convinced I had access to secret papers and two investigators turned my office over for three days until I was able to prove to them that all the information came from tthe Governments own sources, Companies House, Financial papers published by the Scottish financial institutions. End of investigation. The investigation was authorised by the “First Secretary of the Treasury” Aka one Gordon Brown Chancellor et al.

      My paper has had a devastating effect on the unionist parties in Scotland and the tables were used to great effect in canvassing before the election and was responsible for helping to take three seats off Labour. My earlier paper “The Big Lie” which I published in 1999/2000 made the Nationalist community aware that the Scottish economy was effectively contributing more to the UK pot than her population whould logically suggest.

      “The two things that would indicate to me that Scotland has a weaker economy compared to the union as a whole are:
      1) Per capita government spending is higher in Scotland
      2) There is a higher ratio of public to private employment#”

      Both of these are accurate observations except that the Scottish economy is far stronger in other ways with a balance of payments surplus and exports more than She imports.. The UK Government has Government offices in Scotland which carry out functions for Central Government such as two HMRC centres, The Army Pay office in Glasgow being the most prominent. Yes they do employ Scots but will they after Independence? It should be noted that the entire Cost of Trident and its Aldermaston AEA are likewise charged to the Scottish account instead of proportionately per population ration.

      Agreed that there are more people employed in the public sector but this will change radically after Independence when a newly envigorated Financisl sector is allowed to grow, freed from the restrictions imposed by Westminster at the behest of the City of London.

      For example, this comment criticising the PAYE tax system seemed somewhat unlikely to me:
      “the UK’s PAYE System is very inefficient requiring 48.3 pence in every pound collected for its internal administration”
      AFAICR, PAYE brings in about £250bn –

      Here I will correct this statement. Approximately 41% of all taxpayers paid very little tax and the costs were 48.3% of all revenues collected. I should have said that at the beginning but was in a hurry. The Middle range taxpayers percentage is very much smaller at 7-9 % and the higher rate taxpayers is less than a penny in the pound to administer. I got these figures from a friend who was an Inspector in the then Inland Revenue and have no reason to doubt the veracity of the figures

      I hope this goes some way towards answering your queries. Now that I am in the throes of retiring and selling my practice, I will have more time to devote to Independence.

    • This thread at Motley Fool with questions to and answers from Niall Aslen might be of interest:-

      http://boards.fool.co.uk/scottish-democratic-alliance-12260969.aspx?sort=whole

      The questions were about this report:-

      [url]http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/article/13/The_Great_Deception_GERS_2005(2).pdf[/url]

      “Having read “The Great Deception” report from the above website, I find the author’s calculations less than rock-solid. To be fair he does raise some valid points however certain assumptions coupled with a fair number of typing and grammatical errors do not fill me with confidence. There is also the style of the document, it reads more like a blog posting than any kind of serious financial analysis*.”

      I would like you to tell me which calculations you find less than rock solid…..

      This article was written over 7 months and finalised in a hurry to meet the deadline of a month before the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections therefore there are some typo errors. As for grammar it should be noted that English is NOT my first language. Gaidhlig (Gaelic) is my mother tongue and I was forced to learn English at School when I was 4 years old at a time when the British Government were following the policy of eradicating Gaelic and Welsh. (It failed miserably as an attempt at cultural genocide.) Even though I speak English quite well I still find it to be a crude language which is difficult to learn and whose rules of Grammar fall far short of what is desired.

      Also it should be noted that I am an Accountant in public practice and I put my personal reputation on the line when I published this paper. The response from the Labour party was to threaten newspaper editors and their owners with sanctions such as withdrawal of advertising revenues, if they printed or commented on my paper. Then I was investigated by the treasury who were convinced I had access to secret papers and two investigators turned my office over for three days until I was able to prove to them that all the information came from tthe Governments own sources, Companies House, Financial papers published by the Scottish financial institutions. End of investigation. The investigation was authorised by the “First Secretary of the Treasury” Aka one Gordon Brown Chancellor et al.

      My paper has had a devastating effect on the unionist parties in Scotland and the tables were used to great effect in canvassing before the election and was responsible for helping to take three seats off Labour. My earlier paper “The Big Lie” which I published in 1999/2000 made the Nationalist community aware that the Scottish economy was effectively contributing more to the UK pot than her population whould logically suggest.

      “The two things that would indicate to me that Scotland has a weaker economy compared to the union as a whole are:
      1) Per capita government spending is higher in Scotland
      2) There is a higher ratio of public to private employment#”

      Both of these are accurate observations except that the Scottish economy is far stronger in other ways with a balance of payments surplus and exports more than She imports.. The UK Government has Government offices in Scotland which carry out functions for Central Government such as two HMRC centres, The Army Pay office in Glasgow being the most prominent. Yes they do employ Scots but will they after Independence? It should be noted that the entire Cost of Trident and its Aldermaston AEA are likewise charged to the Scottish account instead of proportionately per population ration.

      Agreed that there are more people employed in the public sector but this will change radically after Independence when a newly envigorated Financisl sector is allowed to grow, freed from the restrictions imposed by Westminster at the behest of the City of London.

      For example, this comment criticising the PAYE tax system seemed somewhat unlikely to me:
      “the UK’s PAYE System is very inefficient requiring 48.3 pence in every pound collected for its internal administration”
      AFAICR, PAYE brings in about £250bn –

      Here I will correct this statement. Approximately 41% of all taxpayers paid very little tax and the costs were 48.3% of all revenues collected. I should have said that at the beginning but was in a hurry. The Middle range taxpayers percentage is very much smaller at 7-9 % and the higher rate taxpayers is less than a penny in the pound to administer. I got these figures from a friend who was an Inspector in the then Inland Revenue and have no reason to doubt the veracity of the figures

      I hope this goes some way towards answering your queries. Now that I am in the throes of retiring and selling my practice, I will have more time to devote to Independence.

    • This thread at Motley Fool with questions to and answers from Niall Aslen might be of interest:-

      http://boards.fool.co.uk/scottish-democratic-alliance-12260969.aspx?sort=whole

      The questions were about this report:-

      [url]http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/article/13/The_Great_Deception_GERS_2005(2).pdf[/url]

      “Having read “The Great Deception” report from the above website, I find the author’s calculations less than rock-solid. To be fair he does raise some valid points however certain assumptions coupled with a fair number of typing and grammatical errors do not fill me with confidence. There is also the style of the document, it reads more like a blog posting than any kind of serious financial analysis*.”

      I would like you to tell me which calculations you find less than rock solid…..

      This article was written over 7 months and finalised in a hurry to meet the deadline of a month before the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections therefore there are some typo errors. As for grammar it should be noted that English is NOT my first language. Gaidhlig (Gaelic) is my mother tongue and I was forced to learn English at School when I was 4 years old at a time when the British Government were following the policy of eradicating Gaelic and Welsh. (It failed miserably as an attempt at cultural genocide.) Even though I speak English quite well I still find it to be a crude language which is difficult to learn and whose rules of Grammar fall far short of what is desired.

      Also it should be noted that I am an Accountant in public practice and I put my personal reputation on the line when I published this paper. The response from the Labour party was to threaten newspaper editors and their owners with sanctions such as withdrawal of advertising revenues, if they printed or commented on my paper. Then I was investigated by the treasury who were convinced I had access to secret papers and two investigators turned my office over for three days until I was able to prove to them that all the information came from tthe Governments own sources, Companies House, Financial papers published by the Scottish financial institutions. End of investigation. The investigation was authorised by the “First Secretary of the Treasury” Aka one Gordon Brown Chancellor et al.

      My paper has had a devastating effect on the unionist parties in Scotland and the tables were used to great effect in canvassing before the election and was responsible for helping to take three seats off Labour. My earlier paper “The Big Lie” which I published in 1999/2000 made the Nationalist community aware that the Scottish economy was effectively contributing more to the UK pot than her population whould logically suggest.

      “The two things that would indicate to me that Scotland has a weaker economy compared to the union as a whole are:
      1) Per capita government spending is higher in Scotland
      2) There is a higher ratio of public to private employment#”

      Both of these are accurate observations except that the Scottish economy is far stronger in other ways with a balance of payments surplus and exports more than She imports.. The UK Government has Government offices in Scotland which carry out functions for Central Government such as two HMRC centres, The Army Pay office in Glasgow being the most prominent. Yes they do employ Scots but will they after Independence? It should be noted that the entire Cost of Trident and its Aldermaston AEA are likewise charged to the Scottish account instead of proportionately per population ration.

      Agreed that there are more people employed in the public sector but this will change radically after Independence when a newly envigorated Financisl sector is allowed to grow, freed from the restrictions imposed by Westminster at the behest of the City of London.

      For example, this comment criticising the PAYE tax system seemed somewhat unlikely to me:
      “the UK’s PAYE System is very inefficient requiring 48.3 pence in every pound collected for its internal administration”
      AFAICR, PAYE brings in about £250bn –

      Here I will correct this statement. Approximately 41% of all taxpayers paid very little tax and the costs were 48.3% of all revenues collected. I should have said that at the beginning but was in a hurry. The Middle range taxpayers percentage is very much smaller at 7-9 % and the higher rate taxpayers is less than a penny in the pound to administer. I got these figures from a friend who was an Inspector in the then Inland Revenue and have no reason to doubt the veracity of the figures

      I hope this goes some way towards answering your queries. Now that I am in the throes of retiring and selling my practice, I will have more time to devote to Independence.

    • This thread at Motley Fool with questions to and answers from Niall Aslen might be of interest:-

      http://boards.fool.co.uk/scottish-democratic-alliance-12260969.aspx?sort=whole

      The questions were about this report:-

      [url]http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/article/13/The_Great_Deception_GERS_2005(2).pdf[/url]

      “Having read “The Great Deception” report from the above website, I find the author’s calculations less than rock-solid. To be fair he does raise some valid points however certain assumptions coupled with a fair number of typing and grammatical errors do not fill me with confidence. There is also the style of the document, it reads more like a blog posting than any kind of serious financial analysis*.”

      I would like you to tell me which calculations you find less than rock solid…..

      This article was written over 7 months and finalised in a hurry to meet the deadline of a month before the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections therefore there are some typo errors. As for grammar it should be noted that English is NOT my first language. Gaidhlig (Gaelic) is my mother tongue and I was forced to learn English at School when I was 4 years old at a time when the British Government were following the policy of eradicating Gaelic and Welsh. (It failed miserably as an attempt at cultural genocide.) Even though I speak English quite well I still find it to be a crude language which is difficult to learn and whose rules of Grammar fall far short of what is desired.

      Also it should be noted that I am an Accountant in public practice and I put my personal reputation on the line when I published this paper. The response from the Labour party was to threaten newspaper editors and their owners with sanctions such as withdrawal of advertising revenues, if they printed or commented on my paper. Then I was investigated by the treasury who were convinced I had access to secret papers and two investigators turned my office over for three days until I was able to prove to them that all the information came from tthe Governments own sources, Companies House, Financial papers published by the Scottish financial institutions. End of investigation. The investigation was authorised by the “First Secretary of the Treasury” Aka one Gordon Brown Chancellor et al.

      My paper has had a devastating effect on the unionist parties in Scotland and the tables were used to great effect in canvassing before the election and was responsible for helping to take three seats off Labour. My earlier paper “The Big Lie” which I published in 1999/2000 made the Nationalist community aware that the Scottish economy was effectively contributing more to the UK pot than her population whould logically suggest.

      “The two things that would indicate to me that Scotland has a weaker economy compared to the union as a whole are:
      1) Per capita government spending is higher in Scotland
      2) There is a higher ratio of public to private employment#”

      Both of these are accurate observations except that the Scottish economy is far stronger in other ways with a balance of payments surplus and exports more than She imports.. The UK Government has Government offices in Scotland which carry out functions for Central Government such as two HMRC centres, The Army Pay office in Glasgow being the most prominent. Yes they do employ Scots but will they after Independence? It should be noted that the entire Cost of Trident and its Aldermaston AEA are likewise charged to the Scottish account instead of proportionately per population ration.

      Agreed that there are more people employed in the public sector but this will change radically after Independence when a newly envigorated Financisl sector is allowed to grow, freed from the restrictions imposed by Westminster at the behest of the City of London.

      For example, this comment criticising the PAYE tax system seemed somewhat unlikely to me:
      “the UK’s PAYE System is very inefficient requiring 48.3 pence in every pound collected for its internal administration”
      AFAICR, PAYE brings in about £250bn –

      Here I will correct this statement. Approximately 41% of all taxpayers paid very little tax and the costs were 48.3% of all revenues collected. I should have said that at the beginning but was in a hurry. The Middle range taxpayers percentage is very much smaller at 7-9 % and the higher rate taxpayers is less than a penny in the pound to administer. I got these figures from a friend who was an Inspector in the then Inland Revenue and have no reason to doubt the veracity of the figures

      I hope this goes some way towards answering your queries. Now that I am in the throes of retiring and selling my practice, I will have more time to devote to Independence.

    • This thread at Motley Fool with questions to and answers from Niall Aslen might be of interest:-

      http://boards.fool.co.uk/scottish-democratic-alliance-12260969.aspx?sort=whole

      The questions were about this report:-

      [url]http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/article/13/The_Great_Deception_GERS_2005(2).pdf[/url]

      “Having read “The Great Deception” report from the above website, I find the author’s calculations less than rock-solid. To be fair he does raise some valid points however certain assumptions coupled with a fair number of typing and grammatical errors do not fill me with confidence. There is also the style of the document, it reads more like a blog posting than any kind of serious financial analysis*.”

      I would like you to tell me which calculations you find less than rock solid…..

      This article was written over 7 months and finalised in a hurry to meet the deadline of a month before the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections therefore there are some typo errors. As for grammar it should be noted that English is NOT my first language. Gaidhlig (Gaelic) is my mother tongue and I was forced to learn English at School when I was 4 years old at a time when the British Government were following the policy of eradicating Gaelic and Welsh. (It failed miserably as an attempt at cultural genocide.) Even though I speak English quite well I still find it to be a crude language which is difficult to learn and whose rules of Grammar fall far short of what is desired.

      Also it should be noted that I am an Accountant in public practice and I put my personal reputation on the line when I published this paper. The response from the Labour party was to threaten newspaper editors and their owners with sanctions such as withdrawal of advertising revenues, if they printed or commented on my paper. Then I was investigated by the treasury who were convinced I had access to secret papers and two investigators turned my office over for three days until I was able to prove to them that all the information came from tthe Governments own sources, Companies House, Financial papers published by the Scottish financial institutions. End of investigation. The investigation was authorised by the “First Secretary of the Treasury” Aka one Gordon Brown Chancellor et al.

      My paper has had a devastating effect on the unionist parties in Scotland and the tables were used to great effect in canvassing before the election and was responsible for helping to take three seats off Labour. My earlier paper “The Big Lie” which I published in 1999/2000 made the Nationalist community aware that the Scottish economy was effectively contributing more to the UK pot than her population whould logically suggest.

      “The two things that would indicate to me that Scotland has a weaker economy compared to the union as a whole are:
      1) Per capita government spending is higher in Scotland
      2) There is a higher ratio of public to private employment#”

      Both of these are accurate observations except that the Scottish economy is far stronger in other ways with a balance of payments surplus and exports more than She imports.. The UK Government has Government offices in Scotland which carry out functions for Central Government such as two HMRC centres, The Army Pay office in Glasgow being the most prominent. Yes they do employ Scots but will they after Independence? It should be noted that the entire Cost of Trident and its Aldermaston AEA are likewise charged to the Scottish account instead of proportionately per population ration.

      Agreed that there are more people employed in the public sector but this will change radically after Independence when a newly envigorated Financisl sector is allowed to grow, freed from the restrictions imposed by Westminster at the behest of the City of London.

      For example, this comment criticising the PAYE tax system seemed somewhat unlikely to me:
      “the UK’s PAYE System is very inefficient requiring 48.3 pence in every pound collected for its internal administration”
      AFAICR, PAYE brings in about £250bn –

      Here I will correct this statement. Approximately 41% of all taxpayers paid very little tax and the costs were 48.3% of all revenues collected. I should have said that at the beginning but was in a hurry. The Middle range taxpayers percentage is very much smaller at 7-9 % and the higher rate taxpayers is less than a penny in the pound to administer. I got these figures from a friend who was an Inspector in the then Inland Revenue and have no reason to doubt the veracity of the figures

      I hope this goes some way towards answering your queries. Now that I am in the throes of retiring and selling my practice, I will have more time to devote to Independence.

    • This thread at Motley Fool with questions to and answers from Niall Aslen might be of interest:-

      http://boards.fool.co.uk/scottish-democratic-alliance-12260969.aspx?sort=whole

      The questions were about this report:-

      [url]http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/article/13/The_Great_Deception_GERS_2005(2).pdf[/url]

      “Having read “The Great Deception” report from the above website, I find the author’s calculations less than rock-solid. To be fair he does raise some valid points however certain assumptions coupled with a fair number of typing and grammatical errors do not fill me with confidence. There is also the style of the document, it reads more like a blog posting than any kind of serious financial analysis*.”

      I would like you to tell me which calculations you find less than rock solid…..

      This article was written over 7 months and finalised in a hurry to meet the deadline of a month before the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections therefore there are some typo errors. As for grammar it should be noted that English is NOT my first language. Gaidhlig (Gaelic) is my mother tongue and I was forced to learn English at School when I was 4 years old at a time when the British Government were following the policy of eradicating Gaelic and Welsh. (It failed miserably as an attempt at cultural genocide.) Even though I speak English quite well I still find it to be a crude language which is difficult to learn and whose rules of Grammar fall far short of what is desired.

      Also it should be noted that I am an Accountant in public practice and I put my personal reputation on the line when I published this paper. The response from the Labour party was to threaten newspaper editors and their owners with sanctions such as withdrawal of advertising revenues, if they printed or commented on my paper. Then I was investigated by the treasury who were convinced I had access to secret papers and two investigators turned my office over for three days until I was able to prove to them that all the information came from tthe Governments own sources, Companies House, Financial papers published by the Scottish financial institutions. End of investigation. The investigation was authorised by the “First Secretary of the Treasury” Aka one Gordon Brown Chancellor et al.

      My paper has had a devastating effect on the unionist parties in Scotland and the tables were used to great effect in canvassing before the election and was responsible for helping to take three seats off Labour. My earlier paper “The Big Lie” which I published in 1999/2000 made the Nationalist community aware that the Scottish economy was effectively contributing more to the UK pot than her population whould logically suggest.

      “The two things that would indicate to me that Scotland has a weaker economy compared to the union as a whole are:
      1) Per capita government spending is higher in Scotland
      2) There is a higher ratio of public to private employment#”

      Both of these are accurate observations except that the Scottish economy is far stronger in other ways with a balance of payments surplus and exports more than She imports.. The UK Government has Government offices in Scotland which carry out functions for Central Government such as two HMRC centres, The Army Pay office in Glasgow being the most prominent. Yes they do employ Scots but will they after Independence? It should be noted that the entire Cost of Trident and its Aldermaston AEA are likewise charged to the Scottish account instead of proportionately per population ration.

      Agreed that there are more people employed in the public sector but this will change radically after Independence when a newly envigorated Financisl sector is allowed to grow, freed from the restrictions imposed by Westminster at the behest of the City of London.

      For example, this comment criticising the PAYE tax system seemed somewhat unlikely to me:
      “the UK’s PAYE System is very inefficient requiring 48.3 pence in every pound collected for its internal administration”
      AFAICR, PAYE brings in about £250bn –

      Here I will correct this statement. Approximately 41% of all taxpayers paid very little tax and the costs were 48.3% of all revenues collected. I should have said that at the beginning but was in a hurry. The Middle range taxpayers percentage is very much smaller at 7-9 % and the higher rate taxpayers is less than a penny in the pound to administer. I got these figures from a friend who was an Inspector in the then Inland Revenue and have no reason to doubt the veracity of the figures

      I hope this goes some way towards answering your queries. Now that I am in the throes of retiring and selling my practice, I will have more time to devote to Independence.

  86. Excellent article.

    I would like to suggest the following:-

    Newsnet sets up a section of the web site dedicated to debating the matter of whether or not Scotland is a contributor or parasite regarding the UK’s finances and settle the matter once and for all.

    1) Take the Gers Report and set out the various detailed headings therein.

    2) Invite submissions as to the exact definition of what each item of income or expenditure consists. e.g. VAT – how much VAT is credited as Scottish Tax and how much VAT is actually paid by Scottish businesses and individuals.

    3) Once contributors have debated the above and agreed the relevant definitions submit detailed questions to government as to what figures to apply to each item using FOI if necessary.

    4) Update the figures annually and if possible produce figures for previous years.

    5) After agreeing on what the current balance is examine each item and define how it would be affected if Independence were to be achieved – again I put forward VAT as an example.

    Perhaps we could then have agreement as to whether or not Scotland is a parasite. At present Unionists say that we are parasites while those in favour of Independence say that we are net contributors but neither side ever gives a detailed justification of their case.

  87. Excellent article.

    I would like to suggest the following:-

    Newsnet sets up a section of the web site dedicated to debating the matter of whether or not Scotland is a contributor or parasite regarding the UK’s finances and settle the matter once and for all.

    1) Take the Gers Report and set out the various detailed headings therein.

    2) Invite submissions as to the exact definition of what each item of income or expenditure consists. e.g. VAT – how much VAT is credited as Scottish Tax and how much VAT is actually paid by Scottish businesses and individuals.

    3) Once contributors have debated the above and agreed the relevant definitions submit detailed questions to government as to what figures to apply to each item using FOI if necessary.

    4) Update the figures annually and if possible produce figures for previous years.

    5) After agreeing on what the current balance is examine each item and define how it would be affected if Independence were to be achieved – again I put forward VAT as an example.

    Perhaps we could then have agreement as to whether or not Scotland is a parasite. At present Unionists say that we are parasites while those in favour of Independence say that we are net contributors but neither side ever gives a detailed justification of their case.

  88. Excellent article.

    I would like to suggest the following:-

    Newsnet sets up a section of the web site dedicated to debating the matter of whether or not Scotland is a contributor or parasite regarding the UK’s finances and settle the matter once and for all.

    1) Take the Gers Report and set out the various detailed headings therein.

    2) Invite submissions as to the exact definition of what each item of income or expenditure consists. e.g. VAT – how much VAT is credited as Scottish Tax and how much VAT is actually paid by Scottish businesses and individuals.

    3) Once contributors have debated the above and agreed the relevant definitions submit detailed questions to government as to what figures to apply to each item using FOI if necessary.

    4) Update the figures annually and if possible produce figures for previous years.

    5) After agreeing on what the current balance is examine each item and define how it would be affected if Independence were to be achieved – again I put forward VAT as an example.

    Perhaps we could then have agreement as to whether or not Scotland is a parasite. At present Unionists say that we are parasites while those in favour of Independence say that we are net contributors but neither side ever gives a detailed justification of their case.

  89. Excellent article.

    I would like to suggest the following:-

    Newsnet sets up a section of the web site dedicated to debating the matter of whether or not Scotland is a contributor or parasite regarding the UK’s finances and settle the matter once and for all.

    1) Take the Gers Report and set out the various detailed headings therein.

    2) Invite submissions as to the exact definition of what each item of income or expenditure consists. e.g. VAT – how much VAT is credited as Scottish Tax and how much VAT is actually paid by Scottish businesses and individuals.

    3) Once contributors have debated the above and agreed the relevant definitions submit detailed questions to government as to what figures to apply to each item using FOI if necessary.

    4) Update the figures annually and if possible produce figures for previous years.

    5) After agreeing on what the current balance is examine each item and define how it would be affected if Independence were to be achieved – again I put forward VAT as an example.

    Perhaps we could then have agreement as to whether or not Scotland is a parasite. At present Unionists say that we are parasites while those in favour of Independence say that we are net contributors but neither side ever gives a detailed justification of their case.

  90. Excellent article.

    I would like to suggest the following:-

    Newsnet sets up a section of the web site dedicated to debating the matter of whether or not Scotland is a contributor or parasite regarding the UK’s finances and settle the matter once and for all.

    1) Take the Gers Report and set out the various detailed headings therein.

    2) Invite submissions as to the exact definition of what each item of income or expenditure consists. e.g. VAT – how much VAT is credited as Scottish Tax and how much VAT is actually paid by Scottish businesses and individuals.

    3) Once contributors have debated the above and agreed the relevant definitions submit detailed questions to government as to what figures to apply to each item using FOI if necessary.

    4) Update the figures annually and if possible produce figures for previous years.

    5) After agreeing on what the current balance is examine each item and define how it would be affected if Independence were to be achieved – again I put forward VAT as an example.

    Perhaps we could then have agreement as to whether or not Scotland is a parasite. At present Unionists say that we are parasites while those in favour of Independence say that we are net contributors but neither side ever gives a detailed justification of their case.

  91. good article but if we need to discuss and debate issues such as a Scottish currency we need to have an [b]UNBIASED[/b] news media. We need the facts both positive and not so positive laid out in front of us and examined by our politicians with no underhand agenda to prevent us getting the truth. I cannot trust the BBC to do this. As I started my car this morning the radio came on and Radio Scotland had two ‘guests’ analysing Alex Salmond’s speech. One was Gerry Hassan and the other Peter McMahon an ex labour spin doctor. The theme was of negativity of cant do this and it will be dificult to do that etc etc etc I immediately tuned into Talk Sport because for me at least they are unashamededly English broadcastors which is more pallatable than the twisted logic of Radio Scotland.

  92. good article but if we need to discuss and debate issues such as a Scottish currency we need to have an [b]UNBIASED[/b] news media. We need the facts both positive and not so positive laid out in front of us and examined by our politicians with no underhand agenda to prevent us getting the truth. I cannot trust the BBC to do this. As I started my car this morning the radio came on and Radio Scotland had two ‘guests’ analysing Alex Salmond’s speech. One was Gerry Hassan and the other Peter McMahon an ex labour spin doctor. The theme was of negativity of cant do this and it will be dificult to do that etc etc etc I immediately tuned into Talk Sport because for me at least they are unashamededly English broadcastors which is more pallatable than the twisted logic of Radio Scotland.

  93. good article but if we need to discuss and debate issues such as a Scottish currency we need to have an [b]UNBIASED[/b] news media. We need the facts both positive and not so positive laid out in front of us and examined by our politicians with no underhand agenda to prevent us getting the truth. I cannot trust the BBC to do this. As I started my car this morning the radio came on and Radio Scotland had two ‘guests’ analysing Alex Salmond’s speech. One was Gerry Hassan and the other Peter McMahon an ex labour spin doctor. The theme was of negativity of cant do this and it will be dificult to do that etc etc etc I immediately tuned into Talk Sport because for me at least they are unashamededly English broadcastors which is more pallatable than the twisted logic of Radio Scotland.

  94. good article but if we need to discuss and debate issues such as a Scottish currency we need to have an [b]UNBIASED[/b] news media. We need the facts both positive and not so positive laid out in front of us and examined by our politicians with no underhand agenda to prevent us getting the truth. I cannot trust the BBC to do this. As I started my car this morning the radio came on and Radio Scotland had two ‘guests’ analysing Alex Salmond’s speech. One was Gerry Hassan and the other Peter McMahon an ex labour spin doctor. The theme was of negativity of cant do this and it will be dificult to do that etc etc etc I immediately tuned into Talk Sport because for me at least they are unashamededly English broadcastors which is more pallatable than the twisted logic of Radio Scotland.

  95. good article but if we need to discuss and debate issues such as a Scottish currency we need to have an [b]UNBIASED[/b] news media. We need the facts both positive and not so positive laid out in front of us and examined by our politicians with no underhand agenda to prevent us getting the truth. I cannot trust the BBC to do this. As I started my car this morning the radio came on and Radio Scotland had two ‘guests’ analysing Alex Salmond’s speech. One was Gerry Hassan and the other Peter McMahon an ex labour spin doctor. The theme was of negativity of cant do this and it will be dificult to do that etc etc etc I immediately tuned into Talk Sport because for me at least they are unashamededly English broadcastors which is more pallatable than the twisted logic of Radio Scotland.

  96. good article but if we need to discuss and debate issues such as a Scottish currency we need to have an [b]UNBIASED[/b] news media. We need the facts both positive and not so positive laid out in front of us and examined by our politicians with no underhand agenda to prevent us getting the truth. I cannot trust the BBC to do this. As I started my car this morning the radio came on and Radio Scotland had two ‘guests’ analysing Alex Salmond’s speech. One was Gerry Hassan and the other Peter McMahon an ex labour spin doctor. The theme was of negativity of cant do this and it will be dificult to do that etc etc etc I immediately tuned into Talk Sport because for me at least they are unashamededly English broadcastors which is more pallatable than the twisted logic of Radio Scotland.

  97. Utter, utter bolleaux.

    The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

    I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.

    • You rather over-estimate your own ‘normality’.
      Any news on the encroaching Muslim Caliphate? Have they reached the walls of Vienna yet?

    • You rather over-estimate your own ‘normality’.
      Any news on the encroaching Muslim Caliphate? Have they reached the walls of Vienna yet?

    • You rather over-estimate your own ‘normality’.
      Any news on the encroaching Muslim Caliphate? Have they reached the walls of Vienna yet?

    • You rather over-estimate your own ‘normality’.
      Any news on the encroaching Muslim Caliphate? Have they reached the walls of Vienna yet?

    • You rather over-estimate your own ‘normality’.
      Any news on the encroaching Muslim Caliphate? Have they reached the walls of Vienna yet?

    • You rather over-estimate your own ‘normality’.
      Any news on the encroaching Muslim Caliphate? Have they reached the walls of Vienna yet?

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

      [b][NNS Moderation Team]
      [No name calling, if you please][/b]

      • [quote name=”Angus Ogg”][quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

        The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

        I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

        As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

        [b][NNS Moderation Team]
        [No name calling, if you please][/b][/quote]

        I really do object in the strongest possible manner to the double standards you have just displayed in your moderation. I really do think you need to relax a wee bit, step back and look at what you have just done.

        357ms has just maligned the author of the article and then gone on to abuse and offend any one who posts on here expressing SNP sympathies and you let that stand. Fair enough I can take the abuse. However what I find offensive is your censoring a totally justified reply by me to that abuse, in kind, I reserve the right to fight fire with fire. Not with one hand behind my back.

        On the bench mark you have just set then the post by 357ms ought to have been censored also. Or are we to assume that Billy Connolly type cloaked sweary words are acceptable. So if I tell 357ms to FECK OF it is OK, as would be calling someone a BARSTEWARD? Can you see where this goes now?

      • [quote name=”Angus Ogg”][quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

        The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

        I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

        As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

        [b][NNS Moderation Team]
        [No name calling, if you please][/b][/quote]

        I really do object in the strongest possible manner to the double standards you have just displayed in your moderation. I really do think you need to relax a wee bit, step back and look at what you have just done.

        357ms has just maligned the author of the article and then gone on to abuse and offend any one who posts on here expressing SNP sympathies and you let that stand. Fair enough I can take the abuse. However what I find offensive is your censoring a totally justified reply by me to that abuse, in kind, I reserve the right to fight fire with fire. Not with one hand behind my back.

        On the bench mark you have just set then the post by 357ms ought to have been censored also. Or are we to assume that Billy Connolly type cloaked sweary words are acceptable. So if I tell 357ms to FECK OF it is OK, as would be calling someone a BARSTEWARD? Can you see where this goes now?

      • [quote name=”Angus Ogg”][quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

        The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

        I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

        As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

        [b][NNS Moderation Team]
        [No name calling, if you please][/b][/quote]

        I really do object in the strongest possible manner to the double standards you have just displayed in your moderation. I really do think you need to relax a wee bit, step back and look at what you have just done.

        357ms has just maligned the author of the article and then gone on to abuse and offend any one who posts on here expressing SNP sympathies and you let that stand. Fair enough I can take the abuse. However what I find offensive is your censoring a totally justified reply by me to that abuse, in kind, I reserve the right to fight fire with fire. Not with one hand behind my back.

        On the bench mark you have just set then the post by 357ms ought to have been censored also. Or are we to assume that Billy Connolly type cloaked sweary words are acceptable. So if I tell 357ms to FECK OF it is OK, as would be calling someone a BARSTEWARD? Can you see where this goes now?

      • [quote name=”Angus Ogg”][quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

        The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

        I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

        As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

        [b][NNS Moderation Team]
        [No name calling, if you please][/b][/quote]

        I really do object in the strongest possible manner to the double standards you have just displayed in your moderation. I really do think you need to relax a wee bit, step back and look at what you have just done.

        357ms has just maligned the author of the article and then gone on to abuse and offend any one who posts on here expressing SNP sympathies and you let that stand. Fair enough I can take the abuse. However what I find offensive is your censoring a totally justified reply by me to that abuse, in kind, I reserve the right to fight fire with fire. Not with one hand behind my back.

        On the bench mark you have just set then the post by 357ms ought to have been censored also. Or are we to assume that Billy Connolly type cloaked sweary words are acceptable. So if I tell 357ms to FECK OF it is OK, as would be calling someone a BARSTEWARD? Can you see where this goes now?

      • [quote name=”Angus Ogg”][quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

        The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

        I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

        As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

        [b][NNS Moderation Team]
        [No name calling, if you please][/b][/quote]

        I really do object in the strongest possible manner to the double standards you have just displayed in your moderation. I really do think you need to relax a wee bit, step back and look at what you have just done.

        357ms has just maligned the author of the article and then gone on to abuse and offend any one who posts on here expressing SNP sympathies and you let that stand. Fair enough I can take the abuse. However what I find offensive is your censoring a totally justified reply by me to that abuse, in kind, I reserve the right to fight fire with fire. Not with one hand behind my back.

        On the bench mark you have just set then the post by 357ms ought to have been censored also. Or are we to assume that Billy Connolly type cloaked sweary words are acceptable. So if I tell 357ms to FECK OF it is OK, as would be calling someone a BARSTEWARD? Can you see where this goes now?

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

      [b][NNS Moderation Team]
      [No name calling, if you please][/b]

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

      [b][NNS Moderation Team]
      [No name calling, if you please][/b]

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

      [b][NNS Moderation Team]
      [No name calling, if you please][/b]

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

      [b][NNS Moderation Team]
      [No name calling, if you please][/b]

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      As opposed to Britnat ####### ###### ##### to Britnats? Why don’t you pop over to old Alan Cockers on The Telegraph forum? Much more your cup of tea I would have thought. There you can let rip with your full portfolio of ##### anti Scottish filth such we can see every day on that site. There are some ##### people down there. Talking of which, you sound very like Lord Foulkes on The Scotsman. He must have at least 50 monikers on there. Are you the former obsessed ##### Yeah1?. There is a very definite #### about you. Perhaps it is the rubber walls of your room that I can #####.

      [b][NNS Moderation Team]
      [No name calling, if you please][/b]

    • Thanks for expanding on your concerns by illustrating which points you disagree with, of course if you disagree with all of it you could have a field day.

      Why not obliterate the rant with cold hard logic and facts…we won’t be holding our breath

    • Thanks for expanding on your concerns by illustrating which points you disagree with, of course if you disagree with all of it you could have a field day.

      Why not obliterate the rant with cold hard logic and facts…we won’t be holding our breath

    • Thanks for expanding on your concerns by illustrating which points you disagree with, of course if you disagree with all of it you could have a field day.

      Why not obliterate the rant with cold hard logic and facts…we won’t be holding our breath

    • Thanks for expanding on your concerns by illustrating which points you disagree with, of course if you disagree with all of it you could have a field day.

      Why not obliterate the rant with cold hard logic and facts…we won’t be holding our breath

    • Thanks for expanding on your concerns by illustrating which points you disagree with, of course if you disagree with all of it you could have a field day.

      Why not obliterate the rant with cold hard logic and facts…we won’t be holding our breath

    • Thanks for expanding on your concerns by illustrating which points you disagree with, of course if you disagree with all of it you could have a field day.

      Why not obliterate the rant with cold hard logic and facts…we won’t be holding our breath

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      I agree we need challenge and debate. What was your challenge? “It’s just wrong” doesn’t quite do it for me!

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      I agree we need challenge and debate. What was your challenge? “It’s just wrong” doesn’t quite do it for me!

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      I agree we need challenge and debate. What was your challenge? “It’s just wrong” doesn’t quite do it for me!

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      I agree we need challenge and debate. What was your challenge? “It’s just wrong” doesn’t quite do it for me!

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      I agree we need challenge and debate. What was your challenge? “It’s just wrong” doesn’t quite do it for me!

    • [quote name=”357ms”]Utter, utter bolleaux.

      The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

      I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.[/quote]

      I agree we need challenge and debate. What was your challenge? “It’s just wrong” doesn’t quite do it for me!

    • @357ms

      I would like to know how you see the future For OUR SCOTLAND?

      At present our resources are propping up the UK & for doing that we are ridiculed,by the uninformed English media as a waste of tax payers money.

      The Scottish Government is facing a huge cut in the block grant from Westminster because the UK is recovering from years of mismanagement by the previous Labour Government,by fighting wars that really had nothing to do with us,now the Tory/Libdem Coalition are doing the same by wasting £millions on bombing Libya. Why should we have our budget cut because of previous & present Governments desire to continue to be a SUPER POWER.

      Scotland contributes more money to Westminster Government coffers than it gets back, so if you are going to post criticism please do it in a constructive manner rather than being insulting!

      ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

      Alba gu Brath

    • @357ms

      I would like to know how you see the future For OUR SCOTLAND?

      At present our resources are propping up the UK & for doing that we are ridiculed,by the uninformed English media as a waste of tax payers money.

      The Scottish Government is facing a huge cut in the block grant from Westminster because the UK is recovering from years of mismanagement by the previous Labour Government,by fighting wars that really had nothing to do with us,now the Tory/Libdem Coalition are doing the same by wasting £millions on bombing Libya. Why should we have our budget cut because of previous & present Governments desire to continue to be a SUPER POWER.

      Scotland contributes more money to Westminster Government coffers than it gets back, so if you are going to post criticism please do it in a constructive manner rather than being insulting!

      ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

      Alba gu Brath

    • @357ms

      I would like to know how you see the future For OUR SCOTLAND?

      At present our resources are propping up the UK & for doing that we are ridiculed,by the uninformed English media as a waste of tax payers money.

      The Scottish Government is facing a huge cut in the block grant from Westminster because the UK is recovering from years of mismanagement by the previous Labour Government,by fighting wars that really had nothing to do with us,now the Tory/Libdem Coalition are doing the same by wasting £millions on bombing Libya. Why should we have our budget cut because of previous & present Governments desire to continue to be a SUPER POWER.

      Scotland contributes more money to Westminster Government coffers than it gets back, so if you are going to post criticism please do it in a constructive manner rather than being insulting!

      ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

      Alba gu Brath

    • @357ms

      I would like to know how you see the future For OUR SCOTLAND?

      At present our resources are propping up the UK & for doing that we are ridiculed,by the uninformed English media as a waste of tax payers money.

      The Scottish Government is facing a huge cut in the block grant from Westminster because the UK is recovering from years of mismanagement by the previous Labour Government,by fighting wars that really had nothing to do with us,now the Tory/Libdem Coalition are doing the same by wasting £millions on bombing Libya. Why should we have our budget cut because of previous & present Governments desire to continue to be a SUPER POWER.

      Scotland contributes more money to Westminster Government coffers than it gets back, so if you are going to post criticism please do it in a constructive manner rather than being insulting!

      ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

      Alba gu Brath

    • @357ms

      I would like to know how you see the future For OUR SCOTLAND?

      At present our resources are propping up the UK & for doing that we are ridiculed,by the uninformed English media as a waste of tax payers money.

      The Scottish Government is facing a huge cut in the block grant from Westminster because the UK is recovering from years of mismanagement by the previous Labour Government,by fighting wars that really had nothing to do with us,now the Tory/Libdem Coalition are doing the same by wasting £millions on bombing Libya. Why should we have our budget cut because of previous & present Governments desire to continue to be a SUPER POWER.

      Scotland contributes more money to Westminster Government coffers than it gets back, so if you are going to post criticism please do it in a constructive manner rather than being insulting!

      ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

      Alba gu Brath

  98. Utter, utter bolleaux.

    The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

    I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.

  99. Utter, utter bolleaux.

    The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

    I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.

  100. Utter, utter bolleaux.

    The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

    I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.

  101. Utter, utter bolleaux.

    The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

    I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.

  102. Utter, utter bolleaux.

    The more this “news” site clogs itself up with Nat-speaking-unto-Nat drivelling rants like this one, the better.

    I see the author mentions something about having a “bollotix” meter. Well any normal person’s will ping off the scale when they look at this site.

  103. Interesting article, but an independent Scottish currency puts the viability of the project into the hands of the money markets, who happen to be based in London in this hemisphere, and who by their very nature always prefer the status quo. It’s an idea which is fraught with risk. And the national debt is a secondary matter to something as strategic as currency.

    I believe the Euro is ultimately the best option, though again all that can be promised for now is a referendum on joining it. If the SNP says Scotland will immediately sign up to the Euro, the referendum debate will be recast as a debate on the virtues of the Euro vs the pound -which plays into the scaremongering Europhobic Unionist agenda.

    I think the question of currency is to be handled with a great deal of care. It is not so much about getting it right, as not getting it wrong. Once independence has been secured, then obviously it is a whole different question.

    As for joining the EU, we are all currently EU citizens with rights, and some of our taxes have been gone to pay for the EU project. There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.

    • [quote name=”MacNaughton”]There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.[/quote]

      There is EVERY question about since there are no rules and no precedents.

      It would be up to the self-interested decision of the other EU members.

      Two options:

      1) allow “independent” Scotland to inherit membership from the UK – this would include inheriting the Budget rebate

      2) treat Scotland as a new entrant – this would mean no rebate, and more loot for the rest of the EU.

      Er, which do you think they would choose?

      • I agree that the EU members would need to make a political judgement were a member state to dissolve.

        However, the factors that they would consider are vastly greater than your simple choice.

        Scotland would be a net contributer to the EU in any case. The amount of a rebate would be very small beer in EU terms.

        • I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States (1978. Now, I don’t pretend to be a lawyer but the words seem fairly clear.

          http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/3_2_1978.pdf

          I was always sure that when we split from the UK, we would automatically inherit all of its Treaty Obligations (such as NATO, EU)

          However, if I’m reading Section 1 of Article 9 and Section 3 of Article 17 ,I was wrong.

          [i][b]Article 9

          Unilateral declaration by a successor State regarding treaties of the predecessor State[/b]

          1.Obligations or rights under treaties in force in respect of a territory at the date of a succession
          of States do not become the obligations or rights of the successor State or of other States Parties to those
          treaties by reason only of the fact that the successor State has made a unilateral declaration providing for
          the continuance in force of the treaties in respect of its territory.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: We can say that we don’t want to stick to the Treaty (Rome, North Atlantic)and nobody can do anything about it.

          [i][b]Article 17
          Participation in treaties in force at the date of the succession of States[/b]

          3.When, under the terms of the treaty or by reason of the limited number of the negotiating States and the object and purpose of the treaty, the participation of any other State in the treaty must be
          considered as requiring the consent of all the parties, the newly independent State may establish its status as a party to the treaty only with such consent.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: They can say that even if we want in, they don’t want us.

          Basically, Its up to Scotland if we want to be part of the EU and up to the EU if they want Scotland part of it.

          Now, as to the reality, will the EU demand “re-negotiation” of Scottish Entry [i]de facto[/i]and [i]de jure[/i] ?

          Who knows?

          Are they likely to toss the largest oil-producing state in Europe Out just to get rid of a rebate ? If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency so hard you could bounce rocks off it (and may further encourage the idea of a Euro-Bourse for Oil not dependent on the Dollar) ?

          So, all of this “scary” stuff about Europe seems quite clear – if we say we want to be in, and Europe says Yes, without renegotiation, we’re in.

          If Scotland or Europe wish to re-negotiate the terms of entry of the Scottish State, we do that. (CAP and Fish !)

          If we want to “leave” Europe, nothing that anyone can do about it. Doesn’t stop us applying for membership at a later date.

          The decision is for Scotland and for the other members of the EU.

          • “I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States”

            Hilarious – I knew someone credulous would come up with this one.

            When you were “reading” it, did you manage to find the list of states who actually signed it?

            I.e the list of states to which it actually applies?

            Is the UK on that list?

            Come now, tell us the answer, no dallying.

          • If you were “”waiting for it”, then your counter-argument can at best be described as “poor”.

            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention
            b) There would be no “UK” for it to apply to after Scottish independence.

          • a) The Vienna Convention applies only to those states which have signed it. The UK has not. Endex.

            b) Wrong. You’ve just expressed another of the common Nat delusions. Well done.

          • a) The Vienna Convention applies only to those states which have signed it. The UK has not. Endex.

            b) Wrong. You’ve just expressed another of the common Nat delusions. Well done.

          • a) The Vienna Convention applies only to those states which have signed it. The UK has not. Endex.

            b) Wrong. You’ve just expressed another of the common Nat delusions. Well done.

          • a) The Vienna Convention applies only to those states which have signed it. The UK has not. Endex.

            b) Wrong. You’ve just expressed another of the common Nat delusions. Well done.

          • a) The Vienna Convention applies only to those states which have signed it. The UK has not. Endex.

            b) Wrong. You’ve just expressed another of the common Nat delusions. Well done.

          • [quote name=”chiefy1724″]
            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention[/quote]

            http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Overview.aspx?path=overview/definition/page1_en.xml#conventions

            “This generic use of the term “convention” embraces all international agreements, in the same way as does the generic term “treaty”.”

            “Whereas in the last century the term “convention” was regularly employed for bilateral agreements, it now is generally used for formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties. “

            Yes, that really helps your point. Not.

          • You choose to respond to my points twice. Are there two of you or don’t you have access to the EDIT button ?

          • You choose to respond to my points twice. Are there two of you or don’t you have access to the EDIT button ?

          • You choose to respond to my points twice. Are there two of you or don’t you have access to the EDIT button ?

          • You choose to respond to my points twice. Are there two of you or don’t you have access to the EDIT button ?

          • You choose to respond to my points twice. Are there two of you or don’t you have access to the EDIT button ?

          • [quote name=”chiefy1724″]
            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention[/quote]

            http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Overview.aspx?path=overview/definition/page1_en.xml#conventions

            “This generic use of the term “convention” embraces all international agreements, in the same way as does the generic term “treaty”.”

            “Whereas in the last century the term “convention” was regularly employed for bilateral agreements, it now is generally used for formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties. “

            Yes, that really helps your point. Not.

          • [quote name=”chiefy1724″]
            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention[/quote]

            http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Overview.aspx?path=overview/definition/page1_en.xml#conventions

            “This generic use of the term “convention” embraces all international agreements, in the same way as does the generic term “treaty”.”

            “Whereas in the last century the term “convention” was regularly employed for bilateral agreements, it now is generally used for formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties. “

            Yes, that really helps your point. Not.

          • [quote name=”chiefy1724″]
            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention[/quote]

            http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Overview.aspx?path=overview/definition/page1_en.xml#conventions

            “This generic use of the term “convention” embraces all international agreements, in the same way as does the generic term “treaty”.”

            “Whereas in the last century the term “convention” was regularly employed for bilateral agreements, it now is generally used for formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties. “

            Yes, that really helps your point. Not.

          • [quote name=”chiefy1724″]
            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention[/quote]

            http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Overview.aspx?path=overview/definition/page1_en.xml#conventions

            “This generic use of the term “convention” embraces all international agreements, in the same way as does the generic term “treaty”.”

            “Whereas in the last century the term “convention” was regularly employed for bilateral agreements, it now is generally used for formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties. “

            Yes, that really helps your point. Not.

          • If you were “”waiting for it”, then your counter-argument can at best be described as “poor”.

            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention
            b) There would be no “UK” for it to apply to after Scottish independence.

          • If you were “”waiting for it”, then your counter-argument can at best be described as “poor”.

            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention
            b) There would be no “UK” for it to apply to after Scottish independence.

          • If you were “”waiting for it”, then your counter-argument can at best be described as “poor”.

            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention
            b) There would be no “UK” for it to apply to after Scottish independence.

          • If you were “”waiting for it”, then your counter-argument can at best be described as “poor”.

            I suggest you consider

            a)The difference between a Treaty and a Convention
            b) There would be no “UK” for it to apply to after Scottish independence.

          • “I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States”

            Hilarious – I knew someone credulous would come up with this one.

            When you were “reading” it, did you manage to find the list of states who actually signed it?

            I.e the list of states to which it actually applies?

            Is the UK on that list?

            Come now, tell us the answer, no dallying.

          • “I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States”

            Hilarious – I knew someone credulous would come up with this one.

            When you were “reading” it, did you manage to find the list of states who actually signed it?

            I.e the list of states to which it actually applies?

            Is the UK on that list?

            Come now, tell us the answer, no dallying.

          • “I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States”

            Hilarious – I knew someone credulous would come up with this one.

            When you were “reading” it, did you manage to find the list of states who actually signed it?

            I.e the list of states to which it actually applies?

            Is the UK on that list?

            Come now, tell us the answer, no dallying.

          • “I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States”

            Hilarious – I knew someone credulous would come up with this one.

            When you were “reading” it, did you manage to find the list of states who actually signed it?

            I.e the list of states to which it actually applies?

            Is the UK on that list?

            Come now, tell us the answer, no dallying.

          • “I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States”

            Hilarious – I knew someone credulous would come up with this one.

            When you were “reading” it, did you manage to find the list of states who actually signed it?

            I.e the list of states to which it actually applies?

            Is the UK on that list?

            Come now, tell us the answer, no dallying.

          • “If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency”

            Another “Question to which the Answer is No”.

            The Euro isn’t a “petro-currency” now, and it includes the not-insignificant oil and gas production of the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Italy, is it?

            And I don’t recall anyone claiming that the Euro would suddenly become a “petro-currency” if the UK joined either.

            Thanks for that – you’ve just given me another ##### pro-independence argument.

            [b][NNS Moderation Team]

            [No name calling, if you please][/b]

          • I’m not aware I was required to give one.

            However, I work for a living and contribute to this site in my own time, not my employers. I’m now on my own time again.

            If you would care to debate, please do so.

            If you wish to merely thinly veil insults, then IMHO your “contributions” would be better “welcomed” elsewhere.

          • I’m not aware I was required to give one.

            However, I work for a living and contribute to this site in my own time, not my employers. I’m now on my own time again.

            If you would care to debate, please do so.

            If you wish to merely thinly veil insults, then IMHO your “contributions” would be better “welcomed” elsewhere.

          • I’m not aware I was required to give one.

            However, I work for a living and contribute to this site in my own time, not my employers. I’m now on my own time again.

            If you would care to debate, please do so.

            If you wish to merely thinly veil insults, then IMHO your “contributions” would be better “welcomed” elsewhere.

          • I’m not aware I was required to give one.

            However, I work for a living and contribute to this site in my own time, not my employers. I’m now on my own time again.

            If you would care to debate, please do so.

            If you wish to merely thinly veil insults, then IMHO your “contributions” would be better “welcomed” elsewhere.

          • I’m not aware I was required to give one.

            However, I work for a living and contribute to this site in my own time, not my employers. I’m now on my own time again.

            If you would care to debate, please do so.

            If you wish to merely thinly veil insults, then IMHO your “contributions” would be better “welcomed” elsewhere.

          • “If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency”

            Another “Question to which the Answer is No”.

            The Euro isn’t a “petro-currency” now, and it includes the not-insignificant oil and gas production of the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Italy, is it?

            And I don’t recall anyone claiming that the Euro would suddenly become a “petro-currency” if the UK joined either.

            Thanks for that – you’ve just given me another ##### pro-independence argument.

            [b][NNS Moderation Team]

            [No name calling, if you please][/b]

          • “If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency”

            Another “Question to which the Answer is No”.

            The Euro isn’t a “petro-currency” now, and it includes the not-insignificant oil and gas production of the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Italy, is it?

            And I don’t recall anyone claiming that the Euro would suddenly become a “petro-currency” if the UK joined either.

            Thanks for that – you’ve just given me another ##### pro-independence argument.

            [b][NNS Moderation Team]

            [No name calling, if you please][/b]

          • “If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency”

            Another “Question to which the Answer is No”.

            The Euro isn’t a “petro-currency” now, and it includes the not-insignificant oil and gas production of the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Italy, is it?

            And I don’t recall anyone claiming that the Euro would suddenly become a “petro-currency” if the UK joined either.

            Thanks for that – you’ve just given me another ##### pro-independence argument.

            [b][NNS Moderation Team]

            [No name calling, if you please][/b]

          • “If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency”

            Another “Question to which the Answer is No”.

            The Euro isn’t a “petro-currency” now, and it includes the not-insignificant oil and gas production of the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Italy, is it?

            And I don’t recall anyone claiming that the Euro would suddenly become a “petro-currency” if the UK joined either.

            Thanks for that – you’ve just given me another ##### pro-independence argument.

            [b][NNS Moderation Team]

            [No name calling, if you please][/b]

          • Expanding on your findings Chiefy, do you think that it might also mean that membership of the EU for the ‘rump UK’ will not automatically be a given post independence?

            Does it also mean that the good folks down south, presently clamouring for a referendum, which has been denied them, may actually get to have one, but curiously this time it will be about ‘getting back in’?

            If this is the case, the ‘get rid of the jocks’ campaign and commentators doing the rounds in the ‘British’ press will only strengthen their resolve

            Win/win again for the Scots 🙂

          • Oh, I’m sure the rest of the EU would LIKE to apply the same argument to the UK in the event of “independence””.

            They’d just have no chance of making it happen.

            Consider the correlation of forces.

          • I’m sure that you are aware of the Treaty of Union and how the entity know as the United Kingdom came into existence…

            I’m sure you’ll also appreciate, perhaps not acknowledge, that if Scotland secedes from said Treaty, ergo, there will no longer be a United Kingdom

            It will be up to both Scotland and the ‘rump UK’ or whatever it chooses to call itself, to renegotiate their entry… or not

            Dont let facts get in the way of your suppositions

          • I’m sure that you are aware of the Treaty of Union and how the entity know as the United Kingdom came into existence…

            I’m sure you’ll also appreciate, perhaps not acknowledge, that if Scotland secedes from said Treaty, ergo, there will no longer be a United Kingdom

            It will be up to both Scotland and the ‘rump UK’ or whatever it chooses to call itself, to renegotiate their entry… or not

            Dont let facts get in the way of your suppositions

          • I’m sure that you are aware of the Treaty of Union and how the entity know as the United Kingdom came into existence…

            I’m sure you’ll also appreciate, perhaps not acknowledge, that if Scotland secedes from said Treaty, ergo, there will no longer be a United Kingdom

            It will be up to both Scotland and the ‘rump UK’ or whatever it chooses to call itself, to renegotiate their entry… or not

            Dont let facts get in the way of your suppositions

          • I’m sure that you are aware of the Treaty of Union and how the entity know as the United Kingdom came into existence…

            I’m sure you’ll also appreciate, perhaps not acknowledge, that if Scotland secedes from said Treaty, ergo, there will no longer be a United Kingdom

            It will be up to both Scotland and the ‘rump UK’ or whatever it chooses to call itself, to renegotiate their entry… or not

            Dont let facts get in the way of your suppositions

          • I’m sure that you are aware of the Treaty of Union and how the entity know as the United Kingdom came into existence…

            I’m sure you’ll also appreciate, perhaps not acknowledge, that if Scotland secedes from said Treaty, ergo, there will no longer be a United Kingdom

            It will be up to both Scotland and the ‘rump UK’ or whatever it chooses to call itself, to renegotiate their entry… or not

            Dont let facts get in the way of your suppositions

          • Oh, I’m sure the rest of the EU would LIKE to apply the same argument to the UK in the event of “independence””.

            They’d just have no chance of making it happen.

            Consider the correlation of forces.

          • Oh, I’m sure the rest of the EU would LIKE to apply the same argument to the UK in the event of “independence””.

            They’d just have no chance of making it happen.

            Consider the correlation of forces.

          • Oh, I’m sure the rest of the EU would LIKE to apply the same argument to the UK in the event of “independence””.

            They’d just have no chance of making it happen.

            Consider the correlation of forces.

          • Oh, I’m sure the rest of the EU would LIKE to apply the same argument to the UK in the event of “independence””.

            They’d just have no chance of making it happen.

            Consider the correlation of forces.

          • Expanding on your findings Chiefy, do you think that it might also mean that membership of the EU for the ‘rump UK’ will not automatically be a given post independence?

            Does it also mean that the good folks down south, presently clamouring for a referendum, which has been denied them, may actually get to have one, but curiously this time it will be about ‘getting back in’?

            If this is the case, the ‘get rid of the jocks’ campaign and commentators doing the rounds in the ‘British’ press will only strengthen their resolve

            Win/win again for the Scots 🙂

          • Expanding on your findings Chiefy, do you think that it might also mean that membership of the EU for the ‘rump UK’ will not automatically be a given post independence?

            Does it also mean that the good folks down south, presently clamouring for a referendum, which has been denied them, may actually get to have one, but curiously this time it will be about ‘getting back in’?

            If this is the case, the ‘get rid of the jocks’ campaign and commentators doing the rounds in the ‘British’ press will only strengthen their resolve

            Win/win again for the Scots 🙂

          • Expanding on your findings Chiefy, do you think that it might also mean that membership of the EU for the ‘rump UK’ will not automatically be a given post independence?

            Does it also mean that the good folks down south, presently clamouring for a referendum, which has been denied them, may actually get to have one, but curiously this time it will be about ‘getting back in’?

            If this is the case, the ‘get rid of the jocks’ campaign and commentators doing the rounds in the ‘British’ press will only strengthen their resolve

            Win/win again for the Scots 🙂

          • Expanding on your findings Chiefy, do you think that it might also mean that membership of the EU for the ‘rump UK’ will not automatically be a given post independence?

            Does it also mean that the good folks down south, presently clamouring for a referendum, which has been denied them, may actually get to have one, but curiously this time it will be about ‘getting back in’?

            If this is the case, the ‘get rid of the jocks’ campaign and commentators doing the rounds in the ‘British’ press will only strengthen their resolve

            Win/win again for the Scots 🙂

        • I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States (1978. Now, I don’t pretend to be a lawyer but the words seem fairly clear.

          http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/3_2_1978.pdf

          I was always sure that when we split from the UK, we would automatically inherit all of its Treaty Obligations (such as NATO, EU)

          However, if I’m reading Section 1 of Article 9 and Section 3 of Article 17 ,I was wrong.

          [i][b]Article 9

          Unilateral declaration by a successor State regarding treaties of the predecessor State[/b]

          1.Obligations or rights under treaties in force in respect of a territory at the date of a succession
          of States do not become the obligations or rights of the successor State or of other States Parties to those
          treaties by reason only of the fact that the successor State has made a unilateral declaration providing for
          the continuance in force of the treaties in respect of its territory.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: We can say that we don’t want to stick to the Treaty (Rome, North Atlantic)and nobody can do anything about it.

          [i][b]Article 17
          Participation in treaties in force at the date of the succession of States[/b]

          3.When, under the terms of the treaty or by reason of the limited number of the negotiating States and the object and purpose of the treaty, the participation of any other State in the treaty must be
          considered as requiring the consent of all the parties, the newly independent State may establish its status as a party to the treaty only with such consent.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: They can say that even if we want in, they don’t want us.

          Basically, Its up to Scotland if we want to be part of the EU and up to the EU if they want Scotland part of it.

          Now, as to the reality, will the EU demand “re-negotiation” of Scottish Entry [i]de facto[/i]and [i]de jure[/i] ?

          Who knows?

          Are they likely to toss the largest oil-producing state in Europe Out just to get rid of a rebate ? If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency so hard you could bounce rocks off it (and may further encourage the idea of a Euro-Bourse for Oil not dependent on the Dollar) ?

          So, all of this “scary” stuff about Europe seems quite clear – if we say we want to be in, and Europe says Yes, without renegotiation, we’re in.

          If Scotland or Europe wish to re-negotiate the terms of entry of the Scottish State, we do that. (CAP and Fish !)

          If we want to “leave” Europe, nothing that anyone can do about it. Doesn’t stop us applying for membership at a later date.

          The decision is for Scotland and for the other members of the EU.

        • I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States (1978. Now, I don’t pretend to be a lawyer but the words seem fairly clear.

          http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/3_2_1978.pdf

          I was always sure that when we split from the UK, we would automatically inherit all of its Treaty Obligations (such as NATO, EU)

          However, if I’m reading Section 1 of Article 9 and Section 3 of Article 17 ,I was wrong.

          [i][b]Article 9

          Unilateral declaration by a successor State regarding treaties of the predecessor State[/b]

          1.Obligations or rights under treaties in force in respect of a territory at the date of a succession
          of States do not become the obligations or rights of the successor State or of other States Parties to those
          treaties by reason only of the fact that the successor State has made a unilateral declaration providing for
          the continuance in force of the treaties in respect of its territory.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: We can say that we don’t want to stick to the Treaty (Rome, North Atlantic)and nobody can do anything about it.

          [i][b]Article 17
          Participation in treaties in force at the date of the succession of States[/b]

          3.When, under the terms of the treaty or by reason of the limited number of the negotiating States and the object and purpose of the treaty, the participation of any other State in the treaty must be
          considered as requiring the consent of all the parties, the newly independent State may establish its status as a party to the treaty only with such consent.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: They can say that even if we want in, they don’t want us.

          Basically, Its up to Scotland if we want to be part of the EU and up to the EU if they want Scotland part of it.

          Now, as to the reality, will the EU demand “re-negotiation” of Scottish Entry [i]de facto[/i]and [i]de jure[/i] ?

          Who knows?

          Are they likely to toss the largest oil-producing state in Europe Out just to get rid of a rebate ? If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency so hard you could bounce rocks off it (and may further encourage the idea of a Euro-Bourse for Oil not dependent on the Dollar) ?

          So, all of this “scary” stuff about Europe seems quite clear – if we say we want to be in, and Europe says Yes, without renegotiation, we’re in.

          If Scotland or Europe wish to re-negotiate the terms of entry of the Scottish State, we do that. (CAP and Fish !)

          If we want to “leave” Europe, nothing that anyone can do about it. Doesn’t stop us applying for membership at a later date.

          The decision is for Scotland and for the other members of the EU.

        • I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States (1978. Now, I don’t pretend to be a lawyer but the words seem fairly clear.

          http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/3_2_1978.pdf

          I was always sure that when we split from the UK, we would automatically inherit all of its Treaty Obligations (such as NATO, EU)

          However, if I’m reading Section 1 of Article 9 and Section 3 of Article 17 ,I was wrong.

          [i][b]Article 9

          Unilateral declaration by a successor State regarding treaties of the predecessor State[/b]

          1.Obligations or rights under treaties in force in respect of a territory at the date of a succession
          of States do not become the obligations or rights of the successor State or of other States Parties to those
          treaties by reason only of the fact that the successor State has made a unilateral declaration providing for
          the continuance in force of the treaties in respect of its territory.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: We can say that we don’t want to stick to the Treaty (Rome, North Atlantic)and nobody can do anything about it.

          [i][b]Article 17
          Participation in treaties in force at the date of the succession of States[/b]

          3.When, under the terms of the treaty or by reason of the limited number of the negotiating States and the object and purpose of the treaty, the participation of any other State in the treaty must be
          considered as requiring the consent of all the parties, the newly independent State may establish its status as a party to the treaty only with such consent.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: They can say that even if we want in, they don’t want us.

          Basically, Its up to Scotland if we want to be part of the EU and up to the EU if they want Scotland part of it.

          Now, as to the reality, will the EU demand “re-negotiation” of Scottish Entry [i]de facto[/i]and [i]de jure[/i] ?

          Who knows?

          Are they likely to toss the largest oil-producing state in Europe Out just to get rid of a rebate ? If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency so hard you could bounce rocks off it (and may further encourage the idea of a Euro-Bourse for Oil not dependent on the Dollar) ?

          So, all of this “scary” stuff about Europe seems quite clear – if we say we want to be in, and Europe says Yes, without renegotiation, we’re in.

          If Scotland or Europe wish to re-negotiate the terms of entry of the Scottish State, we do that. (CAP and Fish !)

          If we want to “leave” Europe, nothing that anyone can do about it. Doesn’t stop us applying for membership at a later date.

          The decision is for Scotland and for the other members of the EU.

        • I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States (1978. Now, I don’t pretend to be a lawyer but the words seem fairly clear.

          http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/3_2_1978.pdf

          I was always sure that when we split from the UK, we would automatically inherit all of its Treaty Obligations (such as NATO, EU)

          However, if I’m reading Section 1 of Article 9 and Section 3 of Article 17 ,I was wrong.

          [i][b]Article 9

          Unilateral declaration by a successor State regarding treaties of the predecessor State[/b]

          1.Obligations or rights under treaties in force in respect of a territory at the date of a succession
          of States do not become the obligations or rights of the successor State or of other States Parties to those
          treaties by reason only of the fact that the successor State has made a unilateral declaration providing for
          the continuance in force of the treaties in respect of its territory.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: We can say that we don’t want to stick to the Treaty (Rome, North Atlantic)and nobody can do anything about it.

          [i][b]Article 17
          Participation in treaties in force at the date of the succession of States[/b]

          3.When, under the terms of the treaty or by reason of the limited number of the negotiating States and the object and purpose of the treaty, the participation of any other State in the treaty must be
          considered as requiring the consent of all the parties, the newly independent State may establish its status as a party to the treaty only with such consent.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: They can say that even if we want in, they don’t want us.

          Basically, Its up to Scotland if we want to be part of the EU and up to the EU if they want Scotland part of it.

          Now, as to the reality, will the EU demand “re-negotiation” of Scottish Entry [i]de facto[/i]and [i]de jure[/i] ?

          Who knows?

          Are they likely to toss the largest oil-producing state in Europe Out just to get rid of a rebate ? If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency so hard you could bounce rocks off it (and may further encourage the idea of a Euro-Bourse for Oil not dependent on the Dollar) ?

          So, all of this “scary” stuff about Europe seems quite clear – if we say we want to be in, and Europe says Yes, without renegotiation, we’re in.

          If Scotland or Europe wish to re-negotiate the terms of entry of the Scottish State, we do that. (CAP and Fish !)

          If we want to “leave” Europe, nothing that anyone can do about it. Doesn’t stop us applying for membership at a later date.

          The decision is for Scotland and for the other members of the EU.

        • I had a quick read of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States (1978. Now, I don’t pretend to be a lawyer but the words seem fairly clear.

          http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/3_2_1978.pdf

          I was always sure that when we split from the UK, we would automatically inherit all of its Treaty Obligations (such as NATO, EU)

          However, if I’m reading Section 1 of Article 9 and Section 3 of Article 17 ,I was wrong.

          [i][b]Article 9

          Unilateral declaration by a successor State regarding treaties of the predecessor State[/b]

          1.Obligations or rights under treaties in force in respect of a territory at the date of a succession
          of States do not become the obligations or rights of the successor State or of other States Parties to those
          treaties by reason only of the fact that the successor State has made a unilateral declaration providing for
          the continuance in force of the treaties in respect of its territory.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: We can say that we don’t want to stick to the Treaty (Rome, North Atlantic)and nobody can do anything about it.

          [i][b]Article 17
          Participation in treaties in force at the date of the succession of States[/b]

          3.When, under the terms of the treaty or by reason of the limited number of the negotiating States and the object and purpose of the treaty, the participation of any other State in the treaty must be
          considered as requiring the consent of all the parties, the newly independent State may establish its status as a party to the treaty only with such consent.[/i]

          Chiefy Interpretation: They can say that even if we want in, they don’t want us.

          Basically, Its up to Scotland if we want to be part of the EU and up to the EU if they want Scotland part of it.

          Now, as to the reality, will the EU demand “re-negotiation” of Scottish Entry [i]de facto[/i]and [i]de jure[/i] ?

          Who knows?

          Are they likely to toss the largest oil-producing state in Europe Out just to get rid of a rebate ? If Scotland were to join the Euro, wouldn’t this make the Euro a Petro-currency so hard you could bounce rocks off it (and may further encourage the idea of a Euro-Bourse for Oil not dependent on the Dollar) ?

          So, all of this “scary” stuff about Europe seems quite clear – if we say we want to be in, and Europe says Yes, without renegotiation, we’re in.

          If Scotland or Europe wish to re-negotiate the terms of entry of the Scottish State, we do that. (CAP and Fish !)

          If we want to “leave” Europe, nothing that anyone can do about it. Doesn’t stop us applying for membership at a later date.

          The decision is for Scotland and for the other members of the EU.

      • I agree that the EU members would need to make a political judgement were a member state to dissolve.

        However, the factors that they would consider are vastly greater than your simple choice.

        Scotland would be a net contributer to the EU in any case. The amount of a rebate would be very small beer in EU terms.

      • I agree that the EU members would need to make a political judgement were a member state to dissolve.

        However, the factors that they would consider are vastly greater than your simple choice.

        Scotland would be a net contributer to the EU in any case. The amount of a rebate would be very small beer in EU terms.

      • I agree that the EU members would need to make a political judgement were a member state to dissolve.

        However, the factors that they would consider are vastly greater than your simple choice.

        Scotland would be a net contributer to the EU in any case. The amount of a rebate would be very small beer in EU terms.

      • I agree that the EU members would need to make a political judgement were a member state to dissolve.

        However, the factors that they would consider are vastly greater than your simple choice.

        Scotland would be a net contributer to the EU in any case. The amount of a rebate would be very small beer in EU terms.

      • I agree that the EU members would need to make a political judgement were a member state to dissolve.

        However, the factors that they would consider are vastly greater than your simple choice.

        Scotland would be a net contributer to the EU in any case. The amount of a rebate would be very small beer in EU terms.

      • 357ms – I disagree with you, there are a number of reasons why it would be a mere formality for an independent Scotland to become a member state of the EU. Here are some of them:

        1) Philosophical. The EU is not about keeping European countries out of the free trade zone, but bringing them in. The EU has been expanding for the last 30 years. Scotland already fulfills all of the membership criteria, and expansion to the east is still going on, albeit at a slower pace than before. The EU would have to justify why it would not allow Scotland to join, and there are simply no grounds for it according to its own founding principles.

        Countries which are not allowed into the EU are turned away for a REASON, namely, they are trying to fulfil the EU’s entrance criteria, economic, social or, in the case of Turkey, human rights criteria. None of these apply in the case of Scotland. Spain could moan all it likes about Scottish independence, but it cannot block Scotland’s status as a sovereign nation, nor would it try to. It would contravene the founding principles of the EU, which is the declared principle of a common European project. Scotland’s status as a European country is an objective fact, and hence it has a right to be included in that project, unless there are very good grounds to the contrary.

        2) The Catalans would laugh at your argument. They already have the Euro. Are you suggesting that if Catalonia became an independent nation, or the Basque country, that these countries which have been using the Euro for ten years would suddenly have to stop doing so? How would that work?

        3) Scottish tax payers have been contributing to building motorways in Greece (for example) for years now. You can’t suddenly take away their status as EU citizens, with all the rights pertaining, after the taxes they have put into the EU project on the whim of a member state. It wouldn’t stand up legally under EU law.

        4) The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg would protect the status of Scots as EU citizens.

      • 357ms – I disagree with you, there are a number of reasons why it would be a mere formality for an independent Scotland to become a member state of the EU. Here are some of them:

        1) Philosophical. The EU is not about keeping European countries out of the free trade zone, but bringing them in. The EU has been expanding for the last 30 years. Scotland already fulfills all of the membership criteria, and expansion to the east is still going on, albeit at a slower pace than before. The EU would have to justify why it would not allow Scotland to join, and there are simply no grounds for it according to its own founding principles.

        Countries which are not allowed into the EU are turned away for a REASON, namely, they are trying to fulfil the EU’s entrance criteria, economic, social or, in the case of Turkey, human rights criteria. None of these apply in the case of Scotland. Spain could moan all it likes about Scottish independence, but it cannot block Scotland’s status as a sovereign nation, nor would it try to. It would contravene the founding principles of the EU, which is the declared principle of a common European project. Scotland’s status as a European country is an objective fact, and hence it has a right to be included in that project, unless there are very good grounds to the contrary.

        2) The Catalans would laugh at your argument. They already have the Euro. Are you suggesting that if Catalonia became an independent nation, or the Basque country, that these countries which have been using the Euro for ten years would suddenly have to stop doing so? How would that work?

        3) Scottish tax payers have been contributing to building motorways in Greece (for example) for years now. You can’t suddenly take away their status as EU citizens, with all the rights pertaining, after the taxes they have put into the EU project on the whim of a member state. It wouldn’t stand up legally under EU law.

        4) The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg would protect the status of Scots as EU citizens.

      • 357ms – I disagree with you, there are a number of reasons why it would be a mere formality for an independent Scotland to become a member state of the EU. Here are some of them:

        1) Philosophical. The EU is not about keeping European countries out of the free trade zone, but bringing them in. The EU has been expanding for the last 30 years. Scotland already fulfills all of the membership criteria, and expansion to the east is still going on, albeit at a slower pace than before. The EU would have to justify why it would not allow Scotland to join, and there are simply no grounds for it according to its own founding principles.

        Countries which are not allowed into the EU are turned away for a REASON, namely, they are trying to fulfil the EU’s entrance criteria, economic, social or, in the case of Turkey, human rights criteria. None of these apply in the case of Scotland. Spain could moan all it likes about Scottish independence, but it cannot block Scotland’s status as a sovereign nation, nor would it try to. It would contravene the founding principles of the EU, which is the declared principle of a common European project. Scotland’s status as a European country is an objective fact, and hence it has a right to be included in that project, unless there are very good grounds to the contrary.

        2) The Catalans would laugh at your argument. They already have the Euro. Are you suggesting that if Catalonia became an independent nation, or the Basque country, that these countries which have been using the Euro for ten years would suddenly have to stop doing so? How would that work?

        3) Scottish tax payers have been contributing to building motorways in Greece (for example) for years now. You can’t suddenly take away their status as EU citizens, with all the rights pertaining, after the taxes they have put into the EU project on the whim of a member state. It wouldn’t stand up legally under EU law.

        4) The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg would protect the status of Scots as EU citizens.

      • 357ms – I disagree with you, there are a number of reasons why it would be a mere formality for an independent Scotland to become a member state of the EU. Here are some of them:

        1) Philosophical. The EU is not about keeping European countries out of the free trade zone, but bringing them in. The EU has been expanding for the last 30 years. Scotland already fulfills all of the membership criteria, and expansion to the east is still going on, albeit at a slower pace than before. The EU would have to justify why it would not allow Scotland to join, and there are simply no grounds for it according to its own founding principles.

        Countries which are not allowed into the EU are turned away for a REASON, namely, they are trying to fulfil the EU’s entrance criteria, economic, social or, in the case of Turkey, human rights criteria. None of these apply in the case of Scotland. Spain could moan all it likes about Scottish independence, but it cannot block Scotland’s status as a sovereign nation, nor would it try to. It would contravene the founding principles of the EU, which is the declared principle of a common European project. Scotland’s status as a European country is an objective fact, and hence it has a right to be included in that project, unless there are very good grounds to the contrary.

        2) The Catalans would laugh at your argument. They already have the Euro. Are you suggesting that if Catalonia became an independent nation, or the Basque country, that these countries which have been using the Euro for ten years would suddenly have to stop doing so? How would that work?

        3) Scottish tax payers have been contributing to building motorways in Greece (for example) for years now. You can’t suddenly take away their status as EU citizens, with all the rights pertaining, after the taxes they have put into the EU project on the whim of a member state. It wouldn’t stand up legally under EU law.

        4) The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg would protect the status of Scots as EU citizens.

      • 357ms – I disagree with you, there are a number of reasons why it would be a mere formality for an independent Scotland to become a member state of the EU. Here are some of them:

        1) Philosophical. The EU is not about keeping European countries out of the free trade zone, but bringing them in. The EU has been expanding for the last 30 years. Scotland already fulfills all of the membership criteria, and expansion to the east is still going on, albeit at a slower pace than before. The EU would have to justify why it would not allow Scotland to join, and there are simply no grounds for it according to its own founding principles.

        Countries which are not allowed into the EU are turned away for a REASON, namely, they are trying to fulfil the EU’s entrance criteria, economic, social or, in the case of Turkey, human rights criteria. None of these apply in the case of Scotland. Spain could moan all it likes about Scottish independence, but it cannot block Scotland’s status as a sovereign nation, nor would it try to. It would contravene the founding principles of the EU, which is the declared principle of a common European project. Scotland’s status as a European country is an objective fact, and hence it has a right to be included in that project, unless there are very good grounds to the contrary.

        2) The Catalans would laugh at your argument. They already have the Euro. Are you suggesting that if Catalonia became an independent nation, or the Basque country, that these countries which have been using the Euro for ten years would suddenly have to stop doing so? How would that work?

        3) Scottish tax payers have been contributing to building motorways in Greece (for example) for years now. You can’t suddenly take away their status as EU citizens, with all the rights pertaining, after the taxes they have put into the EU project on the whim of a member state. It wouldn’t stand up legally under EU law.

        4) The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg would protect the status of Scots as EU citizens.

    • [quote name=”MacNaughton”]There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.[/quote]

      There is EVERY question about since there are no rules and no precedents.

      It would be up to the self-interested decision of the other EU members.

      Two options:

      1) allow “independent” Scotland to inherit membership from the UK – this would include inheriting the Budget rebate

      2) treat Scotland as a new entrant – this would mean no rebate, and more loot for the rest of the EU.

      Er, which do you think they would choose?

    • [quote name=”MacNaughton”]There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.[/quote]

      There is EVERY question about since there are no rules and no precedents.

      It would be up to the self-interested decision of the other EU members.

      Two options:

      1) allow “independent” Scotland to inherit membership from the UK – this would include inheriting the Budget rebate

      2) treat Scotland as a new entrant – this would mean no rebate, and more loot for the rest of the EU.

      Er, which do you think they would choose?

    • [quote name=”MacNaughton”]There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.[/quote]

      There is EVERY question about since there are no rules and no precedents.

      It would be up to the self-interested decision of the other EU members.

      Two options:

      1) allow “independent” Scotland to inherit membership from the UK – this would include inheriting the Budget rebate

      2) treat Scotland as a new entrant – this would mean no rebate, and more loot for the rest of the EU.

      Er, which do you think they would choose?

    • [quote name=”MacNaughton”]There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.[/quote]

      There is EVERY question about since there are no rules and no precedents.

      It would be up to the self-interested decision of the other EU members.

      Two options:

      1) allow “independent” Scotland to inherit membership from the UK – this would include inheriting the Budget rebate

      2) treat Scotland as a new entrant – this would mean no rebate, and more loot for the rest of the EU.

      Er, which do you think they would choose?

    • [quote name=”MacNaughton”]There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.[/quote]

      There is EVERY question about since there are no rules and no precedents.

      It would be up to the self-interested decision of the other EU members.

      Two options:

      1) allow “independent” Scotland to inherit membership from the UK – this would include inheriting the Budget rebate

      2) treat Scotland as a new entrant – this would mean no rebate, and more loot for the rest of the EU.

      Er, which do you think they would choose?

  104. Interesting article, but an independent Scottish currency puts the viability of the project into the hands of the money markets, who happen to be based in London in this hemisphere, and who by their very nature always prefer the status quo. It’s an idea which is fraught with risk. And the national debt is a secondary matter to something as strategic as currency.

    I believe the Euro is ultimately the best option, though again all that can be promised for now is a referendum on joining it. If the SNP says Scotland will immediately sign up to the Euro, the referendum debate will be recast as a debate on the virtues of the Euro vs the pound -which plays into the scaremongering Europhobic Unionist agenda.

    I think the question of currency is to be handled with a great deal of care. It is not so much about getting it right, as not getting it wrong. Once independence has been secured, then obviously it is a whole different question.

    As for joining the EU, we are all currently EU citizens with rights, and some of our taxes have been gone to pay for the EU project. There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.

  105. Interesting article, but an independent Scottish currency puts the viability of the project into the hands of the money markets, who happen to be based in London in this hemisphere, and who by their very nature always prefer the status quo. It’s an idea which is fraught with risk. And the national debt is a secondary matter to something as strategic as currency.

    I believe the Euro is ultimately the best option, though again all that can be promised for now is a referendum on joining it. If the SNP says Scotland will immediately sign up to the Euro, the referendum debate will be recast as a debate on the virtues of the Euro vs the pound -which plays into the scaremongering Europhobic Unionist agenda.

    I think the question of currency is to be handled with a great deal of care. It is not so much about getting it right, as not getting it wrong. Once independence has been secured, then obviously it is a whole different question.

    As for joining the EU, we are all currently EU citizens with rights, and some of our taxes have been gone to pay for the EU project. There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.

  106. Interesting article, but an independent Scottish currency puts the viability of the project into the hands of the money markets, who happen to be based in London in this hemisphere, and who by their very nature always prefer the status quo. It’s an idea which is fraught with risk. And the national debt is a secondary matter to something as strategic as currency.

    I believe the Euro is ultimately the best option, though again all that can be promised for now is a referendum on joining it. If the SNP says Scotland will immediately sign up to the Euro, the referendum debate will be recast as a debate on the virtues of the Euro vs the pound -which plays into the scaremongering Europhobic Unionist agenda.

    I think the question of currency is to be handled with a great deal of care. It is not so much about getting it right, as not getting it wrong. Once independence has been secured, then obviously it is a whole different question.

    As for joining the EU, we are all currently EU citizens with rights, and some of our taxes have been gone to pay for the EU project. There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.

  107. Interesting article, but an independent Scottish currency puts the viability of the project into the hands of the money markets, who happen to be based in London in this hemisphere, and who by their very nature always prefer the status quo. It’s an idea which is fraught with risk. And the national debt is a secondary matter to something as strategic as currency.

    I believe the Euro is ultimately the best option, though again all that can be promised for now is a referendum on joining it. If the SNP says Scotland will immediately sign up to the Euro, the referendum debate will be recast as a debate on the virtues of the Euro vs the pound -which plays into the scaremongering Europhobic Unionist agenda.

    I think the question of currency is to be handled with a great deal of care. It is not so much about getting it right, as not getting it wrong. Once independence has been secured, then obviously it is a whole different question.

    As for joining the EU, we are all currently EU citizens with rights, and some of our taxes have been gone to pay for the EU project. There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.

  108. Interesting article, but an independent Scottish currency puts the viability of the project into the hands of the money markets, who happen to be based in London in this hemisphere, and who by their very nature always prefer the status quo. It’s an idea which is fraught with risk. And the national debt is a secondary matter to something as strategic as currency.

    I believe the Euro is ultimately the best option, though again all that can be promised for now is a referendum on joining it. If the SNP says Scotland will immediately sign up to the Euro, the referendum debate will be recast as a debate on the virtues of the Euro vs the pound -which plays into the scaremongering Europhobic Unionist agenda.

    I think the question of currency is to be handled with a great deal of care. It is not so much about getting it right, as not getting it wrong. Once independence has been secured, then obviously it is a whole different question.

    As for joining the EU, we are all currently EU citizens with rights, and some of our taxes have been gone to pay for the EU project. There is no question about it, an independent Scotland would automatically be allowed to join the EU, it’s pure scaremongering to suggest otherwise.

  109. Can I also add regarding the ‘medya’ .Until fairly recently I was an avid reader of ‘The Scottish Review’. Unfortunately since the election ,the contribution from Mr Roy has been underwhelming to say the least.It appears like a diary entry, “met opinionated man in pub shocker”, “went for the bus, it rained “I always assumed ‘TSR’ was intended to reflect the whole of Scottish society and questions such as “how do new immigrants feel about the impact of ‘cuts’in Scotland or what do the predominantly elderly members of ‘the kirk’ feel about the goings on in their church ? Would those sort of issues not give a more informed perspective of what is actually happening in Scotland ?Unfortunately what was a different take from an on-line media about this country has gradually become a personal gripe which would’nt go a miss in an Alan Cochrane column.The dominant piece, to me comes across as its my ball and am no playing…Its interesting across the media how poorly they have responded to,in my opinion, the established view being challenged and rather than raise the debate and support their arguments ,the media in Scotland ,in the main have reduced it to personal griping.The positive is (and obviously NNS reflects my own interests),unable to find a balanced view in the MSM rather donate to TSR ,I’m now going to set up a D/D for NNS.

    • What’s your take on bella caledonia ?
      I can’t make my mind up about it. It seems very sensitive to criticism.
      I like TSR though and am glad it’s there.

    • What’s your take on bella caledonia ?
      I can’t make my mind up about it. It seems very sensitive to criticism.
      I like TSR though and am glad it’s there.

    • What’s your take on bella caledonia ?
      I can’t make my mind up about it. It seems very sensitive to criticism.
      I like TSR though and am glad it’s there.

    • What’s your take on bella caledonia ?
      I can’t make my mind up about it. It seems very sensitive to criticism.
      I like TSR though and am glad it’s there.

    • What’s your take on bella caledonia ?
      I can’t make my mind up about it. It seems very sensitive to criticism.
      I like TSR though and am glad it’s there.

    • What’s your take on bella caledonia ?
      I can’t make my mind up about it. It seems very sensitive to criticism.
      I like TSR though and am glad it’s there.

  110. Can I also add regarding the ‘medya’ .Until fairly recently I was an avid reader of ‘The Scottish Review’. Unfortunately since the election ,the contribution from Mr Roy has been underwhelming to say the least.It appears like a diary entry, “met opinionated man in pub shocker”, “went for the bus, it rained “I always assumed ‘TSR’ was intended to reflect the whole of Scottish society and questions such as “how do new immigrants feel about the impact of ‘cuts’in Scotland or what do the predominantly elderly members of ‘the kirk’ feel about the goings on in their church ? Would those sort of issues not give a more informed perspective of what is actually happening in Scotland ?Unfortunately what was a different take from an on-line media about this country has gradually become a personal gripe which would’nt go a miss in an Alan Cochrane column.The dominant piece, to me comes across as its my ball and am no playing…Its interesting across the media how poorly they have responded to,in my opinion, the established view being challenged and rather than raise the debate and support their arguments ,the media in Scotland ,in the main have reduced it to personal griping.The positive is (and obviously NNS reflects my own interests),unable to find a balanced view in the MSM rather donate to TSR ,I’m now going to set up a D/D for NNS.

  111. Can I also add regarding the ‘medya’ .Until fairly recently I was an avid reader of ‘The Scottish Review’. Unfortunately since the election ,the contribution from Mr Roy has been underwhelming to say the least.It appears like a diary entry, “met opinionated man in pub shocker”, “went for the bus, it rained “I always assumed ‘TSR’ was intended to reflect the whole of Scottish society and questions such as “how do new immigrants feel about the impact of ‘cuts’in Scotland or what do the predominantly elderly members of ‘the kirk’ feel about the goings on in their church ? Would those sort of issues not give a more informed perspective of what is actually happening in Scotland ?Unfortunately what was a different take from an on-line media about this country has gradually become a personal gripe which would’nt go a miss in an Alan Cochrane column.The dominant piece, to me comes across as its my ball and am no playing…Its interesting across the media how poorly they have responded to,in my opinion, the established view being challenged and rather than raise the debate and support their arguments ,the media in Scotland ,in the main have reduced it to personal griping.The positive is (and obviously NNS reflects my own interests),unable to find a balanced view in the MSM rather donate to TSR ,I’m now going to set up a D/D for NNS.

  112. Can I also add regarding the ‘medya’ .Until fairly recently I was an avid reader of ‘The Scottish Review’. Unfortunately since the election ,the contribution from Mr Roy has been underwhelming to say the least.It appears like a diary entry, “met opinionated man in pub shocker”, “went for the bus, it rained “I always assumed ‘TSR’ was intended to reflect the whole of Scottish society and questions such as “how do new immigrants feel about the impact of ‘cuts’in Scotland or what do the predominantly elderly members of ‘the kirk’ feel about the goings on in their church ? Would those sort of issues not give a more informed perspective of what is actually happening in Scotland ?Unfortunately what was a different take from an on-line media about this country has gradually become a personal gripe which would’nt go a miss in an Alan Cochrane column.The dominant piece, to me comes across as its my ball and am no playing…Its interesting across the media how poorly they have responded to,in my opinion, the established view being challenged and rather than raise the debate and support their arguments ,the media in Scotland ,in the main have reduced it to personal griping.The positive is (and obviously NNS reflects my own interests),unable to find a balanced view in the MSM rather donate to TSR ,I’m now going to set up a D/D for NNS.

  113. Can I also add regarding the ‘medya’ .Until fairly recently I was an avid reader of ‘The Scottish Review’. Unfortunately since the election ,the contribution from Mr Roy has been underwhelming to say the least.It appears like a diary entry, “met opinionated man in pub shocker”, “went for the bus, it rained “I always assumed ‘TSR’ was intended to reflect the whole of Scottish society and questions such as “how do new immigrants feel about the impact of ‘cuts’in Scotland or what do the predominantly elderly members of ‘the kirk’ feel about the goings on in their church ? Would those sort of issues not give a more informed perspective of what is actually happening in Scotland ?Unfortunately what was a different take from an on-line media about this country has gradually become a personal gripe which would’nt go a miss in an Alan Cochrane column.The dominant piece, to me comes across as its my ball and am no playing…Its interesting across the media how poorly they have responded to,in my opinion, the established view being challenged and rather than raise the debate and support their arguments ,the media in Scotland ,in the main have reduced it to personal griping.The positive is (and obviously NNS reflects my own interests),unable to find a balanced view in the MSM rather donate to TSR ,I’m now going to set up a D/D for NNS.

  114. Can I also add regarding the ‘medya’ .Until fairly recently I was an avid reader of ‘The Scottish Review’. Unfortunately since the election ,the contribution from Mr Roy has been underwhelming to say the least.It appears like a diary entry, “met opinionated man in pub shocker”, “went for the bus, it rained “I always assumed ‘TSR’ was intended to reflect the whole of Scottish society and questions such as “how do new immigrants feel about the impact of ‘cuts’in Scotland or what do the predominantly elderly members of ‘the kirk’ feel about the goings on in their church ? Would those sort of issues not give a more informed perspective of what is actually happening in Scotland ?Unfortunately what was a different take from an on-line media about this country has gradually become a personal gripe which would’nt go a miss in an Alan Cochrane column.The dominant piece, to me comes across as its my ball and am no playing…Its interesting across the media how poorly they have responded to,in my opinion, the established view being challenged and rather than raise the debate and support their arguments ,the media in Scotland ,in the main have reduced it to personal griping.The positive is (and obviously NNS reflects my own interests),unable to find a balanced view in the MSM rather donate to TSR ,I’m now going to set up a D/D for NNS.

  115. A bit confused myself Jimmy, I listened to Mr Hassan this morning mouthing platitudes on the wireless, “all things to all men”? certainly sounded like it.
    Any relation to the Hassan who ran away with the Orange Lodge cash.

  116. A bit confused myself Jimmy, I listened to Mr Hassan this morning mouthing platitudes on the wireless, “all things to all men”? certainly sounded like it.
    Any relation to the Hassan who ran away with the Orange Lodge cash.

  117. A bit confused myself Jimmy, I listened to Mr Hassan this morning mouthing platitudes on the wireless, “all things to all men”? certainly sounded like it.
    Any relation to the Hassan who ran away with the Orange Lodge cash.

  118. A bit confused myself Jimmy, I listened to Mr Hassan this morning mouthing platitudes on the wireless, “all things to all men”? certainly sounded like it.
    Any relation to the Hassan who ran away with the Orange Lodge cash.

  119. A bit confused myself Jimmy, I listened to Mr Hassan this morning mouthing platitudes on the wireless, “all things to all men”? certainly sounded like it.
    Any relation to the Hassan who ran away with the Orange Lodge cash.

  120. A bit confused myself Jimmy, I listened to Mr Hassan this morning mouthing platitudes on the wireless, “all things to all men”? certainly sounded like it.
    Any relation to the Hassan who ran away with the Orange Lodge cash.

  121. What strikes me in the Referendum Campaign is who will actually front the NO Campaign vote.
    For me this is a very big problem for the Unionists. Who will it benefit to see the Oxbridge trio of Cameron, Clegg and Milliband share the same platform?
    Of course you could bring out the old political dinosaurs like Reid,Brown, Wallace, Steele and Forsyth.Will they be looked upon as has-beens?
    Other options will be the new leaders of the Holyrood opposition parties.(Willie Rennie, Baillie/McIntosh Fraser/Carlaw) won’t frighten Salmond in any way.
    I know the NO Campaign will be aided by the Unionist media, and by that I mean the TV and printed media, but as the article says would it have any serious impact on the Campaign given the Internet as a source of information?
    I believe the NO Campaign has more work to do in the future Referendum Campaign than many realise

  122. What strikes me in the Referendum Campaign is who will actually front the NO Campaign vote.
    For me this is a very big problem for the Unionists. Who will it benefit to see the Oxbridge trio of Cameron, Clegg and Milliband share the same platform?
    Of course you could bring out the old political dinosaurs like Reid,Brown, Wallace, Steele and Forsyth.Will they be looked upon as has-beens?
    Other options will be the new leaders of the Holyrood opposition parties.(Willie Rennie, Baillie/McIntosh Fraser/Carlaw) won’t frighten Salmond in any way.
    I know the NO Campaign will be aided by the Unionist media, and by that I mean the TV and printed media, but as the article says would it have any serious impact on the Campaign given the Internet as a source of information?
    I believe the NO Campaign has more work to do in the future Referendum Campaign than many realise

  123. What strikes me in the Referendum Campaign is who will actually front the NO Campaign vote.
    For me this is a very big problem for the Unionists. Who will it benefit to see the Oxbridge trio of Cameron, Clegg and Milliband share the same platform?
    Of course you could bring out the old political dinosaurs like Reid,Brown, Wallace, Steele and Forsyth.Will they be looked upon as has-beens?
    Other options will be the new leaders of the Holyrood opposition parties.(Willie Rennie, Baillie/McIntosh Fraser/Carlaw) won’t frighten Salmond in any way.
    I know the NO Campaign will be aided by the Unionist media, and by that I mean the TV and printed media, but as the article says would it have any serious impact on the Campaign given the Internet as a source of information?
    I believe the NO Campaign has more work to do in the future Referendum Campaign than many realise

  124. What strikes me in the Referendum Campaign is who will actually front the NO Campaign vote.
    For me this is a very big problem for the Unionists. Who will it benefit to see the Oxbridge trio of Cameron, Clegg and Milliband share the same platform?
    Of course you could bring out the old political dinosaurs like Reid,Brown, Wallace, Steele and Forsyth.Will they be looked upon as has-beens?
    Other options will be the new leaders of the Holyrood opposition parties.(Willie Rennie, Baillie/McIntosh Fraser/Carlaw) won’t frighten Salmond in any way.
    I know the NO Campaign will be aided by the Unionist media, and by that I mean the TV and printed media, but as the article says would it have any serious impact on the Campaign given the Internet as a source of information?
    I believe the NO Campaign has more work to do in the future Referendum Campaign than many realise

  125. What strikes me in the Referendum Campaign is who will actually front the NO Campaign vote.
    For me this is a very big problem for the Unionists. Who will it benefit to see the Oxbridge trio of Cameron, Clegg and Milliband share the same platform?
    Of course you could bring out the old political dinosaurs like Reid,Brown, Wallace, Steele and Forsyth.Will they be looked upon as has-beens?
    Other options will be the new leaders of the Holyrood opposition parties.(Willie Rennie, Baillie/McIntosh Fraser/Carlaw) won’t frighten Salmond in any way.
    I know the NO Campaign will be aided by the Unionist media, and by that I mean the TV and printed media, but as the article says would it have any serious impact on the Campaign given the Internet as a source of information?
    I believe the NO Campaign has more work to do in the future Referendum Campaign than many realise

  126. What strikes me in the Referendum Campaign is who will actually front the NO Campaign vote.
    For me this is a very big problem for the Unionists. Who will it benefit to see the Oxbridge trio of Cameron, Clegg and Milliband share the same platform?
    Of course you could bring out the old political dinosaurs like Reid,Brown, Wallace, Steele and Forsyth.Will they be looked upon as has-beens?
    Other options will be the new leaders of the Holyrood opposition parties.(Willie Rennie, Baillie/McIntosh Fraser/Carlaw) won’t frighten Salmond in any way.
    I know the NO Campaign will be aided by the Unionist media, and by that I mean the TV and printed media, but as the article says would it have any serious impact on the Campaign given the Internet as a source of information?
    I believe the NO Campaign has more work to do in the future Referendum Campaign than many realise

  127. If you have any doubts over the wisdom of Scotland being independent these doubts will soon be dissipated.

    The policies being implemented by the present lot in Westminster are far greater in their ideological tyranny than those attempted by Thatcher.

    Using the guise of a financial crises – code name ‘Austerity’ – these Conservative Storm Troopers are intent on demolishing the welfare state, the NHS and the rights and freedoms normally associated with democracy.

    Once the effects of their actions are known and experienced they will be a major influence for the push to independence and for a socially responsible nation.

    At the moment the melting pot is not Scotland it is in fact England, and until the ingredients and temperature of the melt can be analysed and measured Scotland would do well to leave any commitment to tasting until it has cooled.

  128. If you have any doubts over the wisdom of Scotland being independent these doubts will soon be dissipated.

    The policies being implemented by the present lot in Westminster are far greater in their ideological tyranny than those attempted by Thatcher.

    Using the guise of a financial crises – code name ‘Austerity’ – these Conservative Storm Troopers are intent on demolishing the welfare state, the NHS and the rights and freedoms normally associated with democracy.

    Once the effects of their actions are known and experienced they will be a major influence for the push to independence and for a socially responsible nation.

    At the moment the melting pot is not Scotland it is in fact England, and until the ingredients and temperature of the melt can be analysed and measured Scotland would do well to leave any commitment to tasting until it has cooled.

  129. If you have any doubts over the wisdom of Scotland being independent these doubts will soon be dissipated.

    The policies being implemented by the present lot in Westminster are far greater in their ideological tyranny than those attempted by Thatcher.

    Using the guise of a financial crises – code name ‘Austerity’ – these Conservative Storm Troopers are intent on demolishing the welfare state, the NHS and the rights and freedoms normally associated with democracy.

    Once the effects of their actions are known and experienced they will be a major influence for the push to independence and for a socially responsible nation.

    At the moment the melting pot is not Scotland it is in fact England, and until the ingredients and temperature of the melt can be analysed and measured Scotland would do well to leave any commitment to tasting until it has cooled.

  130. If you have any doubts over the wisdom of Scotland being independent these doubts will soon be dissipated.

    The policies being implemented by the present lot in Westminster are far greater in their ideological tyranny than those attempted by Thatcher.

    Using the guise of a financial crises – code name ‘Austerity’ – these Conservative Storm Troopers are intent on demolishing the welfare state, the NHS and the rights and freedoms normally associated with democracy.

    Once the effects of their actions are known and experienced they will be a major influence for the push to independence and for a socially responsible nation.

    At the moment the melting pot is not Scotland it is in fact England, and until the ingredients and temperature of the melt can be analysed and measured Scotland would do well to leave any commitment to tasting until it has cooled.

  131. If you have any doubts over the wisdom of Scotland being independent these doubts will soon be dissipated.

    The policies being implemented by the present lot in Westminster are far greater in their ideological tyranny than those attempted by Thatcher.

    Using the guise of a financial crises – code name ‘Austerity’ – these Conservative Storm Troopers are intent on demolishing the welfare state, the NHS and the rights and freedoms normally associated with democracy.

    Once the effects of their actions are known and experienced they will be a major influence for the push to independence and for a socially responsible nation.

    At the moment the melting pot is not Scotland it is in fact England, and until the ingredients and temperature of the melt can be analysed and measured Scotland would do well to leave any commitment to tasting until it has cooled.

  132. If you have any doubts over the wisdom of Scotland being independent these doubts will soon be dissipated.

    The policies being implemented by the present lot in Westminster are far greater in their ideological tyranny than those attempted by Thatcher.

    Using the guise of a financial crises – code name ‘Austerity’ – these Conservative Storm Troopers are intent on demolishing the welfare state, the NHS and the rights and freedoms normally associated with democracy.

    Once the effects of their actions are known and experienced they will be a major influence for the push to independence and for a socially responsible nation.

    At the moment the melting pot is not Scotland it is in fact England, and until the ingredients and temperature of the melt can be analysed and measured Scotland would do well to leave any commitment to tasting until it has cooled.

  133. @Dougie Douglas 2011-05-27 04:24
    “1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.”

    FFA can only be achieved by Independence (secession from the Union). The Union is broken beyond repair in its present form. If the component parts of the UK cannot agree on how to change the way the UK is governed, then the Scottish people have to be convinced to leave.

    The way forward “secession” is a long and tortuous path but to my mind will take no longer than trying to make the existing system work for Scotland and all the component parts of the UK. This decision can only be made by the Scottish people, so they should be given the opportunity to do so as soon as possible.

    So the debate should be on how Independence will change the way we are governed. Do we want to be continually adjusting our fiscal policies, at the demand of Westminster? Running our national budget on “pocket money” granted from a Westminster Treasury? Rolling over to laws decided by a “sovereign parliament” not a sovereign people?

    The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    What the SNP are advocating is that for the next parliament we have to work within this broken system. They may have power, (which all political parties’ desire) but the “softly” “softly” approach will take much more time to achieve than secession if the Scottish People wish it.

    • exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!

      • Holebender 2011-05-27 14:05
        “exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!”
        Lots of curious posters, I like all music, maybe we can discus your preference.
        Let us just carry on with the same old system, we shall have a better one when Westminster (the sovereign parliament) agree we can have one.

      • Holebender 2011-05-27 14:05
        “exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!”
        Lots of curious posters, I like all music, maybe we can discus your preference.
        Let us just carry on with the same old system, we shall have a better one when Westminster (the sovereign parliament) agree we can have one.

      • Holebender 2011-05-27 14:05
        “exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!”
        Lots of curious posters, I like all music, maybe we can discus your preference.
        Let us just carry on with the same old system, we shall have a better one when Westminster (the sovereign parliament) agree we can have one.

      • Holebender 2011-05-27 14:05
        “exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!”
        Lots of curious posters, I like all music, maybe we can discus your preference.
        Let us just carry on with the same old system, we shall have a better one when Westminster (the sovereign parliament) agree we can have one.

      • Holebender 2011-05-27 14:05
        “exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!”
        Lots of curious posters, I like all music, maybe we can discus your preference.
        Let us just carry on with the same old system, we shall have a better one when Westminster (the sovereign parliament) agree we can have one.

      • [quote name=”Holebender”]exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken![/quote]

        Well said.

      • [quote name=”Holebender”]exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken![/quote]

        Well said.

      • [quote name=”Holebender”]exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken![/quote]

        Well said.

      • [quote name=”Holebender”]exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken![/quote]

        Well said.

      • [quote name=”Holebender”]exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken![/quote]

        Well said.

    • exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!

    • exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!

    • exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!

    • exel, just curious. Do you have any other records? This one has been played so many times it is broken!

  134. @Dougie Douglas 2011-05-27 04:24
    “1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.”

    FFA can only be achieved by Independence (secession from the Union). The Union is broken beyond repair in its present form. If the component parts of the UK cannot agree on how to change the way the UK is governed, then the Scottish people have to be convinced to leave.

    The way forward “secession” is a long and tortuous path but to my mind will take no longer than trying to make the existing system work for Scotland and all the component parts of the UK. This decision can only be made by the Scottish people, so they should be given the opportunity to do so as soon as possible.

    So the debate should be on how Independence will change the way we are governed. Do we want to be continually adjusting our fiscal policies, at the demand of Westminster? Running our national budget on “pocket money” granted from a Westminster Treasury? Rolling over to laws decided by a “sovereign parliament” not a sovereign people?

    The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    What the SNP are advocating is that for the next parliament we have to work within this broken system. They may have power, (which all political parties’ desire) but the “softly” “softly” approach will take much more time to achieve than secession if the Scottish People wish it.

  135. @Dougie Douglas 2011-05-27 04:24
    “1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.”

    FFA can only be achieved by Independence (secession from the Union). The Union is broken beyond repair in its present form. If the component parts of the UK cannot agree on how to change the way the UK is governed, then the Scottish people have to be convinced to leave.

    The way forward “secession” is a long and tortuous path but to my mind will take no longer than trying to make the existing system work for Scotland and all the component parts of the UK. This decision can only be made by the Scottish people, so they should be given the opportunity to do so as soon as possible.

    So the debate should be on how Independence will change the way we are governed. Do we want to be continually adjusting our fiscal policies, at the demand of Westminster? Running our national budget on “pocket money” granted from a Westminster Treasury? Rolling over to laws decided by a “sovereign parliament” not a sovereign people?

    The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    What the SNP are advocating is that for the next parliament we have to work within this broken system. They may have power, (which all political parties’ desire) but the “softly” “softly” approach will take much more time to achieve than secession if the Scottish People wish it.

  136. @Dougie Douglas 2011-05-27 04:24
    “1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.”

    FFA can only be achieved by Independence (secession from the Union). The Union is broken beyond repair in its present form. If the component parts of the UK cannot agree on how to change the way the UK is governed, then the Scottish people have to be convinced to leave.

    The way forward “secession” is a long and tortuous path but to my mind will take no longer than trying to make the existing system work for Scotland and all the component parts of the UK. This decision can only be made by the Scottish people, so they should be given the opportunity to do so as soon as possible.

    So the debate should be on how Independence will change the way we are governed. Do we want to be continually adjusting our fiscal policies, at the demand of Westminster? Running our national budget on “pocket money” granted from a Westminster Treasury? Rolling over to laws decided by a “sovereign parliament” not a sovereign people?

    The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    What the SNP are advocating is that for the next parliament we have to work within this broken system. They may have power, (which all political parties’ desire) but the “softly” “softly” approach will take much more time to achieve than secession if the Scottish People wish it.

  137. @Dougie Douglas 2011-05-27 04:24
    “1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.”

    FFA can only be achieved by Independence (secession from the Union). The Union is broken beyond repair in its present form. If the component parts of the UK cannot agree on how to change the way the UK is governed, then the Scottish people have to be convinced to leave.

    The way forward “secession” is a long and tortuous path but to my mind will take no longer than trying to make the existing system work for Scotland and all the component parts of the UK. This decision can only be made by the Scottish people, so they should be given the opportunity to do so as soon as possible.

    So the debate should be on how Independence will change the way we are governed. Do we want to be continually adjusting our fiscal policies, at the demand of Westminster? Running our national budget on “pocket money” granted from a Westminster Treasury? Rolling over to laws decided by a “sovereign parliament” not a sovereign people?

    The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    What the SNP are advocating is that for the next parliament we have to work within this broken system. They may have power, (which all political parties’ desire) but the “softly” “softly” approach will take much more time to achieve than secession if the Scottish People wish it.

  138. @Dougie Douglas 2011-05-27 04:24
    “1/We should be seeking less barriers to achieving our short term goal of fiscal autonomy (FFA) and medium term Independence, we can patiently wait a few years after FFA and then pursue our own currency. All the arguments against it will have been washed away by the tide of reason, hope and knowledge.”

    FFA can only be achieved by Independence (secession from the Union). The Union is broken beyond repair in its present form. If the component parts of the UK cannot agree on how to change the way the UK is governed, then the Scottish people have to be convinced to leave.

    The way forward “secession” is a long and tortuous path but to my mind will take no longer than trying to make the existing system work for Scotland and all the component parts of the UK. This decision can only be made by the Scottish people, so they should be given the opportunity to do so as soon as possible.

    So the debate should be on how Independence will change the way we are governed. Do we want to be continually adjusting our fiscal policies, at the demand of Westminster? Running our national budget on “pocket money” granted from a Westminster Treasury? Rolling over to laws decided by a “sovereign parliament” not a sovereign people?

    The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    What the SNP are advocating is that for the next parliament we have to work within this broken system. They may have power, (which all political parties’ desire) but the “softly” “softly” approach will take much more time to achieve than secession if the Scottish People wish it.

    • douglas clark 2011-05-27 12:40
      exel,
      “Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?”

      The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    • douglas clark 2011-05-27 12:40
      exel,
      “Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?”

      The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    • douglas clark 2011-05-27 12:40
      exel,
      “Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?”

      The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    • douglas clark 2011-05-27 12:40
      exel,
      “Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?”

      The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    • douglas clark 2011-05-27 12:40
      exel,
      “Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?”

      The unwritten constitution is the problem. The UK needs a written codified constitution and if the component parts do not see the need to fix the UK constitution, the Scottish government should be putting forward a Scottish written constitution for consideration by the people.

    • [quote name=”douglas clark”]exel,

      Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?[/quote]

      A good question, douglas. Here is mine:

      Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?

      • This is the interesting point. In terms of the treaty of union, which Scotland agreed to via the Union with England act of 1707, it really is up to the people of Scotland – which is usually via a democratically elected Government.

        The 1707 act was signed by the Scottish parliament, and so may be ended via the Scottish Parliament.

        The real problem is that the powers which Westminster pre supposes or pretends to have do not in any reality truly exist. The notion that once formed, a parliament of Scotland can be overruled via a different parliament in another country is bizarre. With Union in 1707, the power of Scotland to leave the union if it so chooses never ended.

        In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.

        Many of the actions and assumed powers of Westminster have no real grounding for legitimacy, it is akin to the old saying, you only have the powers you take. This is what Westminster has been doing since 1707. A good example being that no act or law or statute exists whereby it was decided that London would be the capital of the United Kingdom, it could easily have been Edinburgh, or Birmingham. Prior to union, London was the capital of England, and Edinburgh was the capital of Scotland, no formal decision was ever taken, and it is most certainly not in the treaty of union.

        • Robert Louis 2011-05-27 15:50
          “In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.”

          You are probably correct Robert, it does sound absurd, at first read that is. The problem, as has been so often pointed out here. The people of Scotland must agree, when asked the question, whatever the question may be and it must be demonstrable that it is the settled will of those asked.

        • Robert Louis 2011-05-27 15:50
          “In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.”

          You are probably correct Robert, it does sound absurd, at first read that is. The problem, as has been so often pointed out here. The people of Scotland must agree, when asked the question, whatever the question may be and it must be demonstrable that it is the settled will of those asked.

        • Robert Louis 2011-05-27 15:50
          “In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.”

          You are probably correct Robert, it does sound absurd, at first read that is. The problem, as has been so often pointed out here. The people of Scotland must agree, when asked the question, whatever the question may be and it must be demonstrable that it is the settled will of those asked.

        • Robert Louis 2011-05-27 15:50
          “In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.”

          You are probably correct Robert, it does sound absurd, at first read that is. The problem, as has been so often pointed out here. The people of Scotland must agree, when asked the question, whatever the question may be and it must be demonstrable that it is the settled will of those asked.

        • Robert Louis 2011-05-27 15:50
          “In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.”

          You are probably correct Robert, it does sound absurd, at first read that is. The problem, as has been so often pointed out here. The people of Scotland must agree, when asked the question, whatever the question may be and it must be demonstrable that it is the settled will of those asked.

        • Robert Louis 2011-05-27 15:50
          “In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.”

          You are probably correct Robert, it does sound absurd, at first read that is. The problem, as has been so often pointed out here. The people of Scotland must agree, when asked the question, whatever the question may be and it must be demonstrable that it is the settled will of those asked.

        • Robert Louis 2011-05-27 15:50
          “In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.”

          You are probably correct Robert, it does sound absurd, at first read that is. The problem, as has been so often pointed out here. The people of Scotland must agree, when asked the question, whatever the question may be and it must be demonstrable that it is the settled will of those asked.

      • This is the interesting point. In terms of the treaty of union, which Scotland agreed to via the Union with England act of 1707, it really is up to the people of Scotland – which is usually via a democratically elected Government.

        The 1707 act was signed by the Scottish parliament, and so may be ended via the Scottish Parliament.

        The real problem is that the powers which Westminster pre supposes or pretends to have do not in any reality truly exist. The notion that once formed, a parliament of Scotland can be overruled via a different parliament in another country is bizarre. With Union in 1707, the power of Scotland to leave the union if it so chooses never ended.

        In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.

        Many of the actions and assumed powers of Westminster have no real grounding for legitimacy, it is akin to the old saying, you only have the powers you take. This is what Westminster has been doing since 1707. A good example being that no act or law or statute exists whereby it was decided that London would be the capital of the United Kingdom, it could easily have been Edinburgh, or Birmingham. Prior to union, London was the capital of England, and Edinburgh was the capital of Scotland, no formal decision was ever taken, and it is most certainly not in the treaty of union.

      • This is the interesting point. In terms of the treaty of union, which Scotland agreed to via the Union with England act of 1707, it really is up to the people of Scotland – which is usually via a democratically elected Government.

        The 1707 act was signed by the Scottish parliament, and so may be ended via the Scottish Parliament.

        The real problem is that the powers which Westminster pre supposes or pretends to have do not in any reality truly exist. The notion that once formed, a parliament of Scotland can be overruled via a different parliament in another country is bizarre. With Union in 1707, the power of Scotland to leave the union if it so chooses never ended.

        In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.

        Many of the actions and assumed powers of Westminster have no real grounding for legitimacy, it is akin to the old saying, you only have the powers you take. This is what Westminster has been doing since 1707. A good example being that no act or law or statute exists whereby it was decided that London would be the capital of the United Kingdom, it could easily have been Edinburgh, or Birmingham. Prior to union, London was the capital of England, and Edinburgh was the capital of Scotland, no formal decision was ever taken, and it is most certainly not in the treaty of union.

      • This is the interesting point. In terms of the treaty of union, which Scotland agreed to via the Union with England act of 1707, it really is up to the people of Scotland – which is usually via a democratically elected Government.

        The 1707 act was signed by the Scottish parliament, and so may be ended via the Scottish Parliament.

        The real problem is that the powers which Westminster pre supposes or pretends to have do not in any reality truly exist. The notion that once formed, a parliament of Scotland can be overruled via a different parliament in another country is bizarre. With Union in 1707, the power of Scotland to leave the union if it so chooses never ended.

        In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.

        Many of the actions and assumed powers of Westminster have no real grounding for legitimacy, it is akin to the old saying, you only have the powers you take. This is what Westminster has been doing since 1707. A good example being that no act or law or statute exists whereby it was decided that London would be the capital of the United Kingdom, it could easily have been Edinburgh, or Birmingham. Prior to union, London was the capital of England, and Edinburgh was the capital of Scotland, no formal decision was ever taken, and it is most certainly not in the treaty of union.

      • This is the interesting point. In terms of the treaty of union, which Scotland agreed to via the Union with England act of 1707, it really is up to the people of Scotland – which is usually via a democratically elected Government.

        The 1707 act was signed by the Scottish parliament, and so may be ended via the Scottish Parliament.

        The real problem is that the powers which Westminster pre supposes or pretends to have do not in any reality truly exist. The notion that once formed, a parliament of Scotland can be overruled via a different parliament in another country is bizarre. With Union in 1707, the power of Scotland to leave the union if it so chooses never ended.

        In the real world outside the delusionary Westminster bubble, the notion that one of the partners in a union cannot freely choose to leave, is an absurdity.

        Many of the actions and assumed powers of Westminster have no real grounding for legitimacy, it is akin to the old saying, you only have the powers you take. This is what Westminster has been doing since 1707. A good example being that no act or law or statute exists whereby it was decided that London would be the capital of the United Kingdom, it could easily have been Edinburgh, or Birmingham. Prior to union, London was the capital of England, and Edinburgh was the capital of Scotland, no formal decision was ever taken, and it is most certainly not in the treaty of union.

    • [quote name=”douglas clark”]exel,

      Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?[/quote]

      A good question, douglas. Here is mine:

      Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?

    • [quote name=”douglas clark”]exel,

      Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?[/quote]

      A good question, douglas. Here is mine:

      Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?

    • [quote name=”douglas clark”]exel,

      Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?[/quote]

      A good question, douglas. Here is mine:

      Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?

    • [quote name=”douglas clark”]exel,

      Just curious. What do you want the SNP to do? Declare independence tomorrow?[/quote]

      A good question, douglas. Here is mine:

      Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?

    • It is a clear and undoubted fact that the SNP have a draft constitution for an independent Scottish State available to anyone who enquires. It was adopted in the late eighties, but may have to be reconsidered in line with world and European changes since then.

    • It is a clear and undoubted fact that the SNP have a draft constitution for an independent Scottish State available to anyone who enquires. It was adopted in the late eighties, but may have to be reconsidered in line with world and European changes since then.

    • It is a clear and undoubted fact that the SNP have a draft constitution for an independent Scottish State available to anyone who enquires. It was adopted in the late eighties, but may have to be reconsidered in line with world and European changes since then.

    • It is a clear and undoubted fact that the SNP have a draft constitution for an independent Scottish State available to anyone who enquires. It was adopted in the late eighties, but may have to be reconsidered in line with world and European changes since then.

    • It is a clear and undoubted fact that the SNP have a draft constitution for an independent Scottish State available to anyone who enquires. It was adopted in the late eighties, but may have to be reconsidered in line with world and European changes since then.

    • It is a clear and undoubted fact that the SNP have a draft constitution for an independent Scottish State available to anyone who enquires. It was adopted in the late eighties, but may have to be reconsidered in line with world and European changes since then.

    • It is a clear and undoubted fact that the SNP have a draft constitution for an independent Scottish State available to anyone who enquires. It was adopted in the late eighties, but may have to be reconsidered in line with world and European changes since then.

  139. We need to keep repeating that many successful countries have gone down the independence route. Arguments about finance, economy and disentangling administration don’t excite me. When Norway and Sweden separated, these matters were dealt with, no doubt some mistakes were made, but in the end the Independent nations succeeded.

    The excitement of becoming a fully Independent nation, treated not as an appendage of a “greater” state, is what will, I’m sure, continue to draw the upcoming generations to the Independence cause.

  140. We need to keep repeating that many successful countries have gone down the independence route. Arguments about finance, economy and disentangling administration don’t excite me. When Norway and Sweden separated, these matters were dealt with, no doubt some mistakes were made, but in the end the Independent nations succeeded.

    The excitement of becoming a fully Independent nation, treated not as an appendage of a “greater” state, is what will, I’m sure, continue to draw the upcoming generations to the Independence cause.

  141. We need to keep repeating that many successful countries have gone down the independence route. Arguments about finance, economy and disentangling administration don’t excite me. When Norway and Sweden separated, these matters were dealt with, no doubt some mistakes were made, but in the end the Independent nations succeeded.

    The excitement of becoming a fully Independent nation, treated not as an appendage of a “greater” state, is what will, I’m sure, continue to draw the upcoming generations to the Independence cause.

  142. We need to keep repeating that many successful countries have gone down the independence route. Arguments about finance, economy and disentangling administration don’t excite me. When Norway and Sweden separated, these matters were dealt with, no doubt some mistakes were made, but in the end the Independent nations succeeded.

    The excitement of becoming a fully Independent nation, treated not as an appendage of a “greater” state, is what will, I’m sure, continue to draw the upcoming generations to the Independence cause.

  143. We need to keep repeating that many successful countries have gone down the independence route. Arguments about finance, economy and disentangling administration don’t excite me. When Norway and Sweden separated, these matters were dealt with, no doubt some mistakes were made, but in the end the Independent nations succeeded.

    The excitement of becoming a fully Independent nation, treated not as an appendage of a “greater” state, is what will, I’m sure, continue to draw the upcoming generations to the Independence cause.

  144. Ingteresting comments about the currency that would be used.
    In my own opinion, I think it would be a mistake to ‘adopt’ the English pound (I’m calling it the ‘English’ pound as that what it would be if Scotland became an Indpendent country)
    The main reason that we shouldnt is simply this. The pound and its strength is based entirely on the English economy and the Bank of England that sets the interest rates, which reflect the afor mentioned economy. It will make a dramatic change after Independence as the pound,as pointed out will no longer be backed by oil, but purely the wealth creation of London. Where as Scottish economy would be backed by its own wealth creation as well as natural resources including Oil.
    What to do? well first port of call would be to re-examine the setting up of a Scottish currency (I’m ignoring the euro as that just muddies the waters as the euro currently isnt flavour of the month with the likes of Germany and France,who aer growing stronger). A fully indpendent Scottish currency would be the most logical. Like all international currencies it would be recognised, even in England!
    If Scotland were to ‘share’ a currency, then one example in structure, perhaps would be the East Caribbean Dollar. The EC Dollar is shared amongst eight of the nine members of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and is pegged to the US Dollar, perhaps worth looking at, as post Independence, we will be looking at 3 distinct economies, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland (the other elephant in the room)

  145. Ingteresting comments about the currency that would be used.
    In my own opinion, I think it would be a mistake to ‘adopt’ the English pound (I’m calling it the ‘English’ pound as that what it would be if Scotland became an Indpendent country)
    The main reason that we shouldnt is simply this. The pound and its strength is based entirely on the English economy and the Bank of England that sets the interest rates, which reflect the afor mentioned economy. It will make a dramatic change after Independence as the pound,as pointed out will no longer be backed by oil, but purely the wealth creation of London. Where as Scottish economy would be backed by its own wealth creation as well as natural resources including Oil.
    What to do? well first port of call would be to re-examine the setting up of a Scottish currency (I’m ignoring the euro as that just muddies the waters as the euro currently isnt flavour of the month with the likes of Germany and France,who aer growing stronger). A fully indpendent Scottish currency would be the most logical. Like all international currencies it would be recognised, even in England!
    If Scotland were to ‘share’ a currency, then one example in structure, perhaps would be the East Caribbean Dollar. The EC Dollar is shared amongst eight of the nine members of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and is pegged to the US Dollar, perhaps worth looking at, as post Independence, we will be looking at 3 distinct economies, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland (the other elephant in the room)

  146. Ingteresting comments about the currency that would be used.
    In my own opinion, I think it would be a mistake to ‘adopt’ the English pound (I’m calling it the ‘English’ pound as that what it would be if Scotland became an Indpendent country)
    The main reason that we shouldnt is simply this. The pound and its strength is based entirely on the English economy and the Bank of England that sets the interest rates, which reflect the afor mentioned economy. It will make a dramatic change after Independence as the pound,as pointed out will no longer be backed by oil, but purely the wealth creation of London. Where as Scottish economy would be backed by its own wealth creation as well as natural resources including Oil.
    What to do? well first port of call would be to re-examine the setting up of a Scottish currency (I’m ignoring the euro as that just muddies the waters as the euro currently isnt flavour of the month with the likes of Germany and France,who aer growing stronger). A fully indpendent Scottish currency would be the most logical. Like all international currencies it would be recognised, even in England!
    If Scotland were to ‘share’ a currency, then one example in structure, perhaps would be the East Caribbean Dollar. The EC Dollar is shared amongst eight of the nine members of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and is pegged to the US Dollar, perhaps worth looking at, as post Independence, we will be looking at 3 distinct economies, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland (the other elephant in the room)

  147. Ingteresting comments about the currency that would be used.
    In my own opinion, I think it would be a mistake to ‘adopt’ the English pound (I’m calling it the ‘English’ pound as that what it would be if Scotland became an Indpendent country)
    The main reason that we shouldnt is simply this. The pound and its strength is based entirely on the English economy and the Bank of England that sets the interest rates, which reflect the afor mentioned economy. It will make a dramatic change after Independence as the pound,as pointed out will no longer be backed by oil, but purely the wealth creation of London. Where as Scottish economy would be backed by its own wealth creation as well as natural resources including Oil.
    What to do? well first port of call would be to re-examine the setting up of a Scottish currency (I’m ignoring the euro as that just muddies the waters as the euro currently isnt flavour of the month with the likes of Germany and France,who aer growing stronger). A fully indpendent Scottish currency would be the most logical. Like all international currencies it would be recognised, even in England!
    If Scotland were to ‘share’ a currency, then one example in structure, perhaps would be the East Caribbean Dollar. The EC Dollar is shared amongst eight of the nine members of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and is pegged to the US Dollar, perhaps worth looking at, as post Independence, we will be looking at 3 distinct economies, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland (the other elephant in the room)

  148. Ingteresting comments about the currency that would be used.
    In my own opinion, I think it would be a mistake to ‘adopt’ the English pound (I’m calling it the ‘English’ pound as that what it would be if Scotland became an Indpendent country)
    The main reason that we shouldnt is simply this. The pound and its strength is based entirely on the English economy and the Bank of England that sets the interest rates, which reflect the afor mentioned economy. It will make a dramatic change after Independence as the pound,as pointed out will no longer be backed by oil, but purely the wealth creation of London. Where as Scottish economy would be backed by its own wealth creation as well as natural resources including Oil.
    What to do? well first port of call would be to re-examine the setting up of a Scottish currency (I’m ignoring the euro as that just muddies the waters as the euro currently isnt flavour of the month with the likes of Germany and France,who aer growing stronger). A fully indpendent Scottish currency would be the most logical. Like all international currencies it would be recognised, even in England!
    If Scotland were to ‘share’ a currency, then one example in structure, perhaps would be the East Caribbean Dollar. The EC Dollar is shared amongst eight of the nine members of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States and is pegged to the US Dollar, perhaps worth looking at, as post Independence, we will be looking at 3 distinct economies, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland (the other elephant in the room)

  149. re: Angus Ogg I know this is off topic but as a suggestion can we drop the use of the Troll induced term “Cybernat” in reference to ourselves and maybe consider “CyberScots” as a far more realistic description of an computer literate internet savvy nation.

    Alternative suggestions more than welcome – time to ditch the unionist nametag

    Saor Alba

  150. re: Angus Ogg I know this is off topic but as a suggestion can we drop the use of the Troll induced term “Cybernat” in reference to ourselves and maybe consider “CyberScots” as a far more realistic description of an computer literate internet savvy nation.

    Alternative suggestions more than welcome – time to ditch the unionist nametag

    Saor Alba

  151. re: Angus Ogg I know this is off topic but as a suggestion can we drop the use of the Troll induced term “Cybernat” in reference to ourselves and maybe consider “CyberScots” as a far more realistic description of an computer literate internet savvy nation.

    Alternative suggestions more than welcome – time to ditch the unionist nametag

    Saor Alba

  152. re: Angus Ogg I know this is off topic but as a suggestion can we drop the use of the Troll induced term “Cybernat” in reference to ourselves and maybe consider “CyberScots” as a far more realistic description of an computer literate internet savvy nation.

    Alternative suggestions more than welcome – time to ditch the unionist nametag

    Saor Alba

  153. re: Angus Ogg I know this is off topic but as a suggestion can we drop the use of the Troll induced term “Cybernat” in reference to ourselves and maybe consider “CyberScots” as a far more realistic description of an computer literate internet savvy nation.

    Alternative suggestions more than welcome – time to ditch the unionist nametag

    Saor Alba

  154. When considering post independence currencies, what about adopting the Norwegian Krone?

    With our joint oil wealth linked to the same currency, it could prove enticing to the Norwegians, whilst at the same time it would guarantee exchange rate stability and remove the uncertainty of probable runs on sterling and the euro because of the unstable economic climate…

    Just a thought and feel free to shoot me down…

    I wont take it personally 🙂

    • Not bad idea
      I did think about linking to the NKr
      2 very strong oil economies under one strong currency, would certainly be a force to reckon with – only problem I forsee, is chavs like the IMF and the World Bank, keeping coming to us with a begging bowl 😉

    • Not bad idea
      I did think about linking to the NKr
      2 very strong oil economies under one strong currency, would certainly be a force to reckon with – only problem I forsee, is chavs like the IMF and the World Bank, keeping coming to us with a begging bowl 😉

    • Not bad idea
      I did think about linking to the NKr
      2 very strong oil economies under one strong currency, would certainly be a force to reckon with – only problem I forsee, is chavs like the IMF and the World Bank, keeping coming to us with a begging bowl 😉

    • Not bad idea
      I did think about linking to the NKr
      2 very strong oil economies under one strong currency, would certainly be a force to reckon with – only problem I forsee, is chavs like the IMF and the World Bank, keeping coming to us with a begging bowl 😉

    • Not bad idea
      I did think about linking to the NKr
      2 very strong oil economies under one strong currency, would certainly be a force to reckon with – only problem I forsee, is chavs like the IMF and the World Bank, keeping coming to us with a begging bowl 😉

  155. When considering post independence currencies, what about adopting the Norwegian Krone?

    With our joint oil wealth linked to the same currency, it could prove enticing to the Norwegians, whilst at the same time it would guarantee exchange rate stability and remove the uncertainty of probable runs on sterling and the euro because of the unstable economic climate…

    Just a thought and feel free to shoot me down…

    I wont take it personally 🙂

  156. When considering post independence currencies, what about adopting the Norwegian Krone?

    With our joint oil wealth linked to the same currency, it could prove enticing to the Norwegians, whilst at the same time it would guarantee exchange rate stability and remove the uncertainty of probable runs on sterling and the euro because of the unstable economic climate…

    Just a thought and feel free to shoot me down…

    I wont take it personally 🙂

  157. When considering post independence currencies, what about adopting the Norwegian Krone?

    With our joint oil wealth linked to the same currency, it could prove enticing to the Norwegians, whilst at the same time it would guarantee exchange rate stability and remove the uncertainty of probable runs on sterling and the euro because of the unstable economic climate…

    Just a thought and feel free to shoot me down…

    I wont take it personally 🙂

  158. When considering post independence currencies, what about adopting the Norwegian Krone?

    With our joint oil wealth linked to the same currency, it could prove enticing to the Norwegians, whilst at the same time it would guarantee exchange rate stability and remove the uncertainty of probable runs on sterling and the euro because of the unstable economic climate…

    Just a thought and feel free to shoot me down…

    I wont take it personally 🙂

  159. On the currency issue, the SNP stance appears to me that the Pound Sterling would continue immediately after independence but, in the near future, Scots will have to decide what currency they want. This seems sensible to me, but I agree that the SNP could do a lot better at articulating the message.

    The message is that independence will be a series of steps and decisions (monarchy, currency, EU, NATO, etc.) but these steps need to be taken one at a time. The first step is leaving the UK, because no other step can be taken until after that one has been completed. That is the message the SNP should be articulating.

    As for the Euro, it is drowning deeper and deeper in the do-do so it strikes me as extremely fooling to be considering joining now. If the Euro somehow manages to recover it may be worth considering but joining while the Euro is foundering strikes me as madness.

  160. On the currency issue, the SNP stance appears to me that the Pound Sterling would continue immediately after independence but, in the near future, Scots will have to decide what currency they want. This seems sensible to me, but I agree that the SNP could do a lot better at articulating the message.

    The message is that independence will be a series of steps and decisions (monarchy, currency, EU, NATO, etc.) but these steps need to be taken one at a time. The first step is leaving the UK, because no other step can be taken until after that one has been completed. That is the message the SNP should be articulating.

    As for the Euro, it is drowning deeper and deeper in the do-do so it strikes me as extremely fooling to be considering joining now. If the Euro somehow manages to recover it may be worth considering but joining while the Euro is foundering strikes me as madness.

  161. On the currency issue, the SNP stance appears to me that the Pound Sterling would continue immediately after independence but, in the near future, Scots will have to decide what currency they want. This seems sensible to me, but I agree that the SNP could do a lot better at articulating the message.

    The message is that independence will be a series of steps and decisions (monarchy, currency, EU, NATO, etc.) but these steps need to be taken one at a time. The first step is leaving the UK, because no other step can be taken until after that one has been completed. That is the message the SNP should be articulating.

    As for the Euro, it is drowning deeper and deeper in the do-do so it strikes me as extremely fooling to be considering joining now. If the Euro somehow manages to recover it may be worth considering but joining while the Euro is foundering strikes me as madness.

  162. On the currency issue, the SNP stance appears to me that the Pound Sterling would continue immediately after independence but, in the near future, Scots will have to decide what currency they want. This seems sensible to me, but I agree that the SNP could do a lot better at articulating the message.

    The message is that independence will be a series of steps and decisions (monarchy, currency, EU, NATO, etc.) but these steps need to be taken one at a time. The first step is leaving the UK, because no other step can be taken until after that one has been completed. That is the message the SNP should be articulating.

    As for the Euro, it is drowning deeper and deeper in the do-do so it strikes me as extremely fooling to be considering joining now. If the Euro somehow manages to recover it may be worth considering but joining while the Euro is foundering strikes me as madness.

  163. On the currency issue, the SNP stance appears to me that the Pound Sterling would continue immediately after independence but, in the near future, Scots will have to decide what currency they want. This seems sensible to me, but I agree that the SNP could do a lot better at articulating the message.

    The message is that independence will be a series of steps and decisions (monarchy, currency, EU, NATO, etc.) but these steps need to be taken one at a time. The first step is leaving the UK, because no other step can be taken until after that one has been completed. That is the message the SNP should be articulating.

    As for the Euro, it is drowning deeper and deeper in the do-do so it strikes me as extremely fooling to be considering joining now. If the Euro somehow manages to recover it may be worth considering but joining while the Euro is foundering strikes me as madness.

  164. “Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?”

    There is only one parliament that solely represents the people of Scotland. Westminster represents the UK. Holyrood representatives are more democratically elected than the Westminster system. People have just voted in an overwelming majority for what the SNP represents.

  165. “Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?”

    There is only one parliament that solely represents the people of Scotland. Westminster represents the UK. Holyrood representatives are more democratically elected than the Westminster system. People have just voted in an overwelming majority for what the SNP represents.

  166. “Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?”

    There is only one parliament that solely represents the people of Scotland. Westminster represents the UK. Holyrood representatives are more democratically elected than the Westminster system. People have just voted in an overwelming majority for what the SNP represents.

  167. “Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?”

    There is only one parliament that solely represents the people of Scotland. Westminster represents the UK. Holyrood representatives are more democratically elected than the Westminster system. People have just voted in an overwelming majority for what the SNP represents.

  168. “Who has the authority to move for the repeal the 1707 Act of Union, which was passed by the Parliament of Scotland, which was recalled in 1999?”

    There is only one parliament that solely represents the people of Scotland. Westminster represents the UK. Holyrood representatives are more democratically elected than the Westminster system. People have just voted in an overwelming majority for what the SNP represents.

  169. Again what about creating a Scottish Exchequer in preparation for either gradual taking possession of tax or complete? It could start off as a symbol and gradually become what is required of it?

    The last thing you want is to be granted extra funding with Westminster retaining control over collection and management. They could withold payments at a later date or change the system not to mention trying to disentangal that mess if we get our independence.

    If new powers come there has to be a degree of sovereignty and separation. Actually something we should be fighting for is the parliament to be given a degree of sovereignty. So what has been given can’t be taken back in any future Scotland Bill.

  170. Again what about creating a Scottish Exchequer in preparation for either gradual taking possession of tax or complete? It could start off as a symbol and gradually become what is required of it?

    The last thing you want is to be granted extra funding with Westminster retaining control over collection and management. They could withold payments at a later date or change the system not to mention trying to disentangal that mess if we get our independence.

    If new powers come there has to be a degree of sovereignty and separation. Actually something we should be fighting for is the parliament to be given a degree of sovereignty. So what has been given can’t be taken back in any future Scotland Bill.

  171. Again what about creating a Scottish Exchequer in preparation for either gradual taking possession of tax or complete? It could start off as a symbol and gradually become what is required of it?

    The last thing you want is to be granted extra funding with Westminster retaining control over collection and management. They could withold payments at a later date or change the system not to mention trying to disentangal that mess if we get our independence.

    If new powers come there has to be a degree of sovereignty and separation. Actually something we should be fighting for is the parliament to be given a degree of sovereignty. So what has been given can’t be taken back in any future Scotland Bill.

  172. Again what about creating a Scottish Exchequer in preparation for either gradual taking possession of tax or complete? It could start off as a symbol and gradually become what is required of it?

    The last thing you want is to be granted extra funding with Westminster retaining control over collection and management. They could withold payments at a later date or change the system not to mention trying to disentangal that mess if we get our independence.

    If new powers come there has to be a degree of sovereignty and separation. Actually something we should be fighting for is the parliament to be given a degree of sovereignty. So what has been given can’t be taken back in any future Scotland Bill.

  173. Again what about creating a Scottish Exchequer in preparation for either gradual taking possession of tax or complete? It could start off as a symbol and gradually become what is required of it?

    The last thing you want is to be granted extra funding with Westminster retaining control over collection and management. They could withold payments at a later date or change the system not to mention trying to disentangal that mess if we get our independence.

    If new powers come there has to be a degree of sovereignty and separation. Actually something we should be fighting for is the parliament to be given a degree of sovereignty. So what has been given can’t be taken back in any future Scotland Bill.

  174. Her is what I struggle to understand. It seems that most commentators on this forum are keen to join the EU following Scottish Independence. If I ever saw a ‘fryingpan – to – fire’ scenario, this is it. Joining the Euro? Are you all having a laugh? That would lose Scotlands ability to decide it’s own monetary policy. We all see how well that has worked…

    • No, it is more like getting out of the frying pan but still being in the fire! Scotland is in the EU [u]right now[/u] so it is no change to remain in the EU. Here’s what I struggle to understand. Why some people bring up this bogey man of Scotland coming under Brussels control as if it would be a changed situation.

      Without independence, Scotland’s voters have no power to decide whether to remain in the EU or not. It is a decision which can only be made [u]after[/u] becoming independent from the UK.

      As for joining the Euro, that certainly seems like a daft idea right now.

    • No, it is more like getting out of the frying pan but still being in the fire! Scotland is in the EU [u]right now[/u] so it is no change to remain in the EU. Here’s what I struggle to understand. Why some people bring up this bogey man of Scotland coming under Brussels control as if it would be a changed situation.

      Without independence, Scotland’s voters have no power to decide whether to remain in the EU or not. It is a decision which can only be made [u]after[/u] becoming independent from the UK.

      As for joining the Euro, that certainly seems like a daft idea right now.

    • No, it is more like getting out of the frying pan but still being in the fire! Scotland is in the EU [u]right now[/u] so it is no change to remain in the EU. Here’s what I struggle to understand. Why some people bring up this bogey man of Scotland coming under Brussels control as if it would be a changed situation.

      Without independence, Scotland’s voters have no power to decide whether to remain in the EU or not. It is a decision which can only be made [u]after[/u] becoming independent from the UK.

      As for joining the Euro, that certainly seems like a daft idea right now.

    • No, it is more like getting out of the frying pan but still being in the fire! Scotland is in the EU [u]right now[/u] so it is no change to remain in the EU. Here’s what I struggle to understand. Why some people bring up this bogey man of Scotland coming under Brussels control as if it would be a changed situation.

      Without independence, Scotland’s voters have no power to decide whether to remain in the EU or not. It is a decision which can only be made [u]after[/u] becoming independent from the UK.

      As for joining the Euro, that certainly seems like a daft idea right now.

    • No, it is more like getting out of the frying pan but still being in the fire! Scotland is in the EU [u]right now[/u] so it is no change to remain in the EU. Here’s what I struggle to understand. Why some people bring up this bogey man of Scotland coming under Brussels control as if it would be a changed situation.

      Without independence, Scotland’s voters have no power to decide whether to remain in the EU or not. It is a decision which can only be made [u]after[/u] becoming independent from the UK.

      As for joining the Euro, that certainly seems like a daft idea right now.

  175. Her is what I struggle to understand. It seems that most commentators on this forum are keen to join the EU following Scottish Independence. If I ever saw a ‘fryingpan – to – fire’ scenario, this is it. Joining the Euro? Are you all having a laugh? That would lose Scotlands ability to decide it’s own monetary policy. We all see how well that has worked…

  176. Her is what I struggle to understand. It seems that most commentators on this forum are keen to join the EU following Scottish Independence. If I ever saw a ‘fryingpan – to – fire’ scenario, this is it. Joining the Euro? Are you all having a laugh? That would lose Scotlands ability to decide it’s own monetary policy. We all see how well that has worked…

  177. Her is what I struggle to understand. It seems that most commentators on this forum are keen to join the EU following Scottish Independence. If I ever saw a ‘fryingpan – to – fire’ scenario, this is it. Joining the Euro? Are you all having a laugh? That would lose Scotlands ability to decide it’s own monetary policy. We all see how well that has worked…

  178. Her is what I struggle to understand. It seems that most commentators on this forum are keen to join the EU following Scottish Independence. If I ever saw a ‘fryingpan – to – fire’ scenario, this is it. Joining the Euro? Are you all having a laugh? That would lose Scotlands ability to decide it’s own monetary policy. We all see how well that has worked…

  179. Great article Alex,

    I wish newsnetscotland all the best with it future plans,even when the trolls try to disrupt.

    GOOD LUCK

    ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

  180. Great article Alex,

    I wish newsnetscotland all the best with it future plans,even when the trolls try to disrupt.

    GOOD LUCK

    ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

  181. Great article Alex,

    I wish newsnetscotland all the best with it future plans,even when the trolls try to disrupt.

    GOOD LUCK

    ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

  182. Great article Alex,

    I wish newsnetscotland all the best with it future plans,even when the trolls try to disrupt.

    GOOD LUCK

    ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

  183. Great article Alex,

    I wish newsnetscotland all the best with it future plans,even when the trolls try to disrupt.

    GOOD LUCK

    ONE SCOTLAND,OUR SCOTLAND

  184. I am an independentista, but I need the arguments to counter an attack from the Unionists that £13 billion of North Sea oil makes much of a difference in a £600 billion budget. Alex – help please!

    • As I understand it, its not just oil (although its a main earner.) UK debt is mortgaged on future income or ability to pay.

      It’s also about tax receipts too, accepted figures are Scotland represent 9% of the UK population and a similar amount in UK tax income. (income tax, corp tax etc etc etc.)

      I might be wrong but if Scotland became independent, it would mean a further 9% deficit in UK books, its a hell of a rough calculation and possibly over simplified but there it is.

      Its not just about now, its about future earnings.

    • As I understand it, its not just oil (although its a main earner.) UK debt is mortgaged on future income or ability to pay.

      It’s also about tax receipts too, accepted figures are Scotland represent 9% of the UK population and a similar amount in UK tax income. (income tax, corp tax etc etc etc.)

      I might be wrong but if Scotland became independent, it would mean a further 9% deficit in UK books, its a hell of a rough calculation and possibly over simplified but there it is.

      Its not just about now, its about future earnings.

    • As I understand it, its not just oil (although its a main earner.) UK debt is mortgaged on future income or ability to pay.

      It’s also about tax receipts too, accepted figures are Scotland represent 9% of the UK population and a similar amount in UK tax income. (income tax, corp tax etc etc etc.)

      I might be wrong but if Scotland became independent, it would mean a further 9% deficit in UK books, its a hell of a rough calculation and possibly over simplified but there it is.

      Its not just about now, its about future earnings.

    • As I understand it, its not just oil (although its a main earner.) UK debt is mortgaged on future income or ability to pay.

      It’s also about tax receipts too, accepted figures are Scotland represent 9% of the UK population and a similar amount in UK tax income. (income tax, corp tax etc etc etc.)

      I might be wrong but if Scotland became independent, it would mean a further 9% deficit in UK books, its a hell of a rough calculation and possibly over simplified but there it is.

      Its not just about now, its about future earnings.

    • As I understand it, its not just oil (although its a main earner.) UK debt is mortgaged on future income or ability to pay.

      It’s also about tax receipts too, accepted figures are Scotland represent 9% of the UK population and a similar amount in UK tax income. (income tax, corp tax etc etc etc.)

      I might be wrong but if Scotland became independent, it would mean a further 9% deficit in UK books, its a hell of a rough calculation and possibly over simplified but there it is.

      Its not just about now, its about future earnings.

  185. I am an independentista, but I need the arguments to counter an attack from the Unionists that £13 billion of North Sea oil makes much of a difference in a £600 billion budget. Alex – help please!

  186. I am an independentista, but I need the arguments to counter an attack from the Unionists that £13 billion of North Sea oil makes much of a difference in a £600 billion budget. Alex – help please!

  187. I am an independentista, but I need the arguments to counter an attack from the Unionists that £13 billion of North Sea oil makes much of a difference in a £600 billion budget. Alex – help please!

  188. I am an independentista, but I need the arguments to counter an attack from the Unionists that £13 billion of North Sea oil makes much of a difference in a £600 billion budget. Alex – help please!

  189. The Duke of Argyll moved to dissolve the Union, following the perceived illegal malt tax and the riots therefrom, the Scots members being supported in Parliament by the English Junto Whigs. Had the measure succeeded this “for all time” Union would have ended after half a dozen years!
    No generation has the right to bind its successors and limit their ambition, see Hitler’s 1000 Reich or the Irish/British Union which barely lasted a century.

  190. The Duke of Argyll moved to dissolve the Union, following the perceived illegal malt tax and the riots therefrom, the Scots members being supported in Parliament by the English Junto Whigs. Had the measure succeeded this “for all time” Union would have ended after half a dozen years!
    No generation has the right to bind its successors and limit their ambition, see Hitler’s 1000 Reich or the Irish/British Union which barely lasted a century.

  191. The Duke of Argyll moved to dissolve the Union, following the perceived illegal malt tax and the riots therefrom, the Scots members being supported in Parliament by the English Junto Whigs. Had the measure succeeded this “for all time” Union would have ended after half a dozen years!
    No generation has the right to bind its successors and limit their ambition, see Hitler’s 1000 Reich or the Irish/British Union which barely lasted a century.

  192. The Duke of Argyll moved to dissolve the Union, following the perceived illegal malt tax and the riots therefrom, the Scots members being supported in Parliament by the English Junto Whigs. Had the measure succeeded this “for all time” Union would have ended after half a dozen years!
    No generation has the right to bind its successors and limit their ambition, see Hitler’s 1000 Reich or the Irish/British Union which barely lasted a century.

  193. The Duke of Argyll moved to dissolve the Union, following the perceived illegal malt tax and the riots therefrom, the Scots members being supported in Parliament by the English Junto Whigs. Had the measure succeeded this “for all time” Union would have ended after half a dozen years!
    No generation has the right to bind its successors and limit their ambition, see Hitler’s 1000 Reich or the Irish/British Union which barely lasted a century.

  194. Thanks Mei for your post, very informative.

    The article adds weight to my view that the ‘DON’T KNOWS’ are actually soft unionists.

    The Brit nats have been throwing the same excremental negativity at the Scots since forever and yet a third of Scots still say they’re DON’T KNOWS.

    Logically then, these people could be convinced to vote YES given the right arguments properly based on solid facts.it’s

    Salmond knows this and it’s up to us to get the internet pro-independence message everywhere.

    I don’t even talk to Brit nats now (just to end up getting into it with them is a waste of time no matter how much it seems worth it) since the DON’T KNOWS are reading these various sites now and it’s the DON’T KNOWS we need to convince.

    If you’re interested in joining together to form an organised coordinated internet campaign then write me at

    cyberscots@live.com

  195. Thanks Mei for your post, very informative.

    The article adds weight to my view that the ‘DON’T KNOWS’ are actually soft unionists.

    The Brit nats have been throwing the same excremental negativity at the Scots since forever and yet a third of Scots still say they’re DON’T KNOWS.

    Logically then, these people could be convinced to vote YES given the right arguments properly based on solid facts.it’s

    Salmond knows this and it’s up to us to get the internet pro-independence message everywhere.

    I don’t even talk to Brit nats now (just to end up getting into it with them is a waste of time no matter how much it seems worth it) since the DON’T KNOWS are reading these various sites now and it’s the DON’T KNOWS we need to convince.

    If you’re interested in joining together to form an organised coordinated internet campaign then write me at

    cyberscots@live.com

  196. Thanks Mei for your post, very informative.

    The article adds weight to my view that the ‘DON’T KNOWS’ are actually soft unionists.

    The Brit nats have been throwing the same excremental negativity at the Scots since forever and yet a third of Scots still say they’re DON’T KNOWS.

    Logically then, these people could be convinced to vote YES given the right arguments properly based on solid facts.it’s

    Salmond knows this and it’s up to us to get the internet pro-independence message everywhere.

    I don’t even talk to Brit nats now (just to end up getting into it with them is a waste of time no matter how much it seems worth it) since the DON’T KNOWS are reading these various sites now and it’s the DON’T KNOWS we need to convince.

    If you’re interested in joining together to form an organised coordinated internet campaign then write me at

    cyberscots@live.com

  197. Thanks Mei for your post, very informative.

    The article adds weight to my view that the ‘DON’T KNOWS’ are actually soft unionists.

    The Brit nats have been throwing the same excremental negativity at the Scots since forever and yet a third of Scots still say they’re DON’T KNOWS.

    Logically then, these people could be convinced to vote YES given the right arguments properly based on solid facts.it’s

    Salmond knows this and it’s up to us to get the internet pro-independence message everywhere.

    I don’t even talk to Brit nats now (just to end up getting into it with them is a waste of time no matter how much it seems worth it) since the DON’T KNOWS are reading these various sites now and it’s the DON’T KNOWS we need to convince.

    If you’re interested in joining together to form an organised coordinated internet campaign then write me at

    cyberscots@live.com

  198. Thanks Mei for your post, very informative.

    The article adds weight to my view that the ‘DON’T KNOWS’ are actually soft unionists.

    The Brit nats have been throwing the same excremental negativity at the Scots since forever and yet a third of Scots still say they’re DON’T KNOWS.

    Logically then, these people could be convinced to vote YES given the right arguments properly based on solid facts.it’s

    Salmond knows this and it’s up to us to get the internet pro-independence message everywhere.

    I don’t even talk to Brit nats now (just to end up getting into it with them is a waste of time no matter how much it seems worth it) since the DON’T KNOWS are reading these various sites now and it’s the DON’T KNOWS we need to convince.

    If you’re interested in joining together to form an organised coordinated internet campaign then write me at

    cyberscots@live.com

  199. Thanks Mei for your post, very informative.

    The article adds weight to my view that the ‘DON’T KNOWS’ are actually soft unionists.

    The Brit nats have been throwing the same excremental negativity at the Scots since forever and yet a third of Scots still say they’re DON’T KNOWS.

    Logically then, these people could be convinced to vote YES given the right arguments properly based on solid facts.it’s

    Salmond knows this and it’s up to us to get the internet pro-independence message everywhere.

    I don’t even talk to Brit nats now (just to end up getting into it with them is a waste of time no matter how much it seems worth it) since the DON’T KNOWS are reading these various sites now and it’s the DON’T KNOWS we need to convince.

    If you’re interested in joining together to form an organised coordinated internet campaign then write me at

    cyberscots@live.com

  200. tronnis

    I think the Scots should be offered a referendum on joining the Euro, maybe even on joining the EU.

    I’m happy being in the EU but the Euro, I think the Scottish pound will do nicely.

    We already have Scottish currency, why change it straight away?

    • Until the fraudulent undemocratic act of subservience (Union) in 1707 Scottish currency was doyts, bodles, groat, placks, bawbee, merks. It may someday be again Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro. With no parliament, no National treasury and no voice in the undemocratic Union, Scots have had to accept all the dung slung at them from the South Easter Superiority of Whitehall for the past 300 years.

      Even today we are debating Corporation Tax powers and not one single reporter has dared mention the 22 cities and towns of England (inc London) which already have the powers to alter or forgo 100% corporation tax given them in the last budget.

      Mr Cameron clearly, does not understand the concept of his promised [b]Respect Agenda[/b] for Scotland.

      • [quote name=”.Scot”]Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro.[/quote]

        Have you been following what has been happening to the Euro? Does the acronym [b]PIIGS[/b] ring any bells? The Euro is in dire straits and anyone joining now or in the near future should be referred to a head examiner.

      • [quote name=”.Scot”]Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro.[/quote]

        Have you been following what has been happening to the Euro? Does the acronym [b]PIIGS[/b] ring any bells? The Euro is in dire straits and anyone joining now or in the near future should be referred to a head examiner.

      • [quote name=”.Scot”]Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro.[/quote]

        Have you been following what has been happening to the Euro? Does the acronym [b]PIIGS[/b] ring any bells? The Euro is in dire straits and anyone joining now or in the near future should be referred to a head examiner.

      • [quote name=”.Scot”]Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro.[/quote]

        Have you been following what has been happening to the Euro? Does the acronym [b]PIIGS[/b] ring any bells? The Euro is in dire straits and anyone joining now or in the near future should be referred to a head examiner.

      • [quote name=”.Scot”]Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro.[/quote]

        Have you been following what has been happening to the Euro? Does the acronym [b]PIIGS[/b] ring any bells? The Euro is in dire straits and anyone joining now or in the near future should be referred to a head examiner.

      • [quote name=”.Scot”]Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro.[/quote]

        Have you been following what has been happening to the Euro? Does the acronym [b]PIIGS[/b] ring any bells? The Euro is in dire straits and anyone joining now or in the near future should be referred to a head examiner.

    • Until the fraudulent undemocratic act of subservience (Union) in 1707 Scottish currency was doyts, bodles, groat, placks, bawbee, merks. It may someday be again Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro. With no parliament, no National treasury and no voice in the undemocratic Union, Scots have had to accept all the dung slung at them from the South Easter Superiority of Whitehall for the past 300 years.

      Even today we are debating Corporation Tax powers and not one single reporter has dared mention the 22 cities and towns of England (inc London) which already have the powers to alter or forgo 100% corporation tax given them in the last budget.

      Mr Cameron clearly, does not understand the concept of his promised [b]Respect Agenda[/b] for Scotland.

    • Until the fraudulent undemocratic act of subservience (Union) in 1707 Scottish currency was doyts, bodles, groat, placks, bawbee, merks. It may someday be again Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro. With no parliament, no National treasury and no voice in the undemocratic Union, Scots have had to accept all the dung slung at them from the South Easter Superiority of Whitehall for the past 300 years.

      Even today we are debating Corporation Tax powers and not one single reporter has dared mention the 22 cities and towns of England (inc London) which already have the powers to alter or forgo 100% corporation tax given them in the last budget.

      Mr Cameron clearly, does not understand the concept of his promised [b]Respect Agenda[/b] for Scotland.

    • Until the fraudulent undemocratic act of subservience (Union) in 1707 Scottish currency was doyts, bodles, groat, placks, bawbee, merks. It may someday be again Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro. With no parliament, no National treasury and no voice in the undemocratic Union, Scots have had to accept all the dung slung at them from the South Easter Superiority of Whitehall for the past 300 years.

      Even today we are debating Corporation Tax powers and not one single reporter has dared mention the 22 cities and towns of England (inc London) which already have the powers to alter or forgo 100% corporation tax given them in the last budget.

      Mr Cameron clearly, does not understand the concept of his promised [b]Respect Agenda[/b] for Scotland.

    • Until the fraudulent undemocratic act of subservience (Union) in 1707 Scottish currency was doyts, bodles, groat, placks, bawbee, merks. It may someday be again Unless Scots take the wise step of joining the more stable Euro. With no parliament, no National treasury and no voice in the undemocratic Union, Scots have had to accept all the dung slung at them from the South Easter Superiority of Whitehall for the past 300 years.

      Even today we are debating Corporation Tax powers and not one single reporter has dared mention the 22 cities and towns of England (inc London) which already have the powers to alter or forgo 100% corporation tax given them in the last budget.

      Mr Cameron clearly, does not understand the concept of his promised [b]Respect Agenda[/b] for Scotland.