Wednesday, 15 January 2014

Recent developments...

The independence debate seems to have entered a new phase and on the surface, a far more damaging one for the no campaign. With the recent announcement from the UK Treasury about honouring its debt responsibilities, arguments around Scotland's share of it and the currency union have coalesced and not in a way that suits Better Together at all.

Better Together Campaign Director on being told of the news from the UK Treasury

George Osborne and others have said time and again that a currency union would be fraught with problems so cannot be guaranteed - locking an independent Scotland out of something that belong to us all. But now, that argument goes up in smoke, Scotland reimbursing the UK treasury for its negotiated share of UK debt really would be fraught with problems if we had to do it with a currency other than Sterling.

When you add that very obvious - some say game changing news - to the hubbub of differing soundbites coming from people within the same union-supporting political parties, for me anyway, it brings in to focus what independence is really about for them.

With David Cameron telling us he won't talk about independence because its a matter for the Scottish people while giving statements to the press in support of the union (and begging other countries to do the same,) Johann Lamont saying one thing after Miliband said the opposite and politicians like Ian Davidson and their poisonous ravings about cybernats and 'separation' - for them, the debate isn't about whats best for Scotland, its about whats best for them.

Johann Lamont I think just isn't very good at her job, her place in the Scottish parliament depends more on her constituents not noticing just how rubbish she is rather than the Independence referendum outcome. The same goes for David Cameron, the vote in September won't affect him, going by how well previous PM's have done, he's already got it made. Osborne is already rich and Iain Duncan Smith (for example) has a rich father-in-law - more-over they're English MP's who won't lose their place at the trough if Scotland votes yes.

Now though, the politicians and people who are becoming ever more vocal in their rubbishing of the Independence debate are those who'll lose out. MP's from Scottish constituencies, Scottish 'lords' sitting on the red benches at Westminster (£300 a day just for turning up) and all the 'hingers-oan' who benefit from the status quo. What I think we're seeing is a polarisation in the unionist camp, on the one side you have those who'll lose out completely, and on the other, those that won't (they might even benefit from it...)

Will the rest of the UK want Scottish lords in their parliament? I wouldn't have thought so, will people in England, Wales & Northern Ireland think - "Hold on, we can't afford to lose Baron Purvis of Tweed can we? And what about Lord Ffoulkes of Cumnock?"

Baron Ffoulkes of Cumnock - no more £300 a day.

Jeremy Purvis, I still have no idea how or why he was 'elevated' to the HoL's. That he was, underlines what a waste of time it is.
Alistair Darling, Better Together Leader, is a Westminster MP from a Scottish constituency. He'll lose his job unless you do what he says and vote no, surely you'd have to question his motives in the debate, or - bearing in mind he's a politician - do you take him at his word? If you are, compare and contrast with someone like Stuart Hosie (SNP MP) who'll lose his job if you vote yes - except he wants you to.

In any other circumstance on any other topic, you would be very suspicious about a person trying to convince you to do as they say knowing it'll enrich them hugely over being invited to do something by someone else that will result in that person losing out.

Of course that isn't a reason by itself to vote one way or the other, but it should (surely) help inform who - on balance - you are prepared to believe more.

Meanwhile, I think we can expect more fracturing in the Unionist campaign. I don't think David Cameron actually cares if we vote yes, he's a spiv who's made his place anyway. The old-school empire-fetishists (from all parties) will continue to squeal but its those who have the most to lose who we'll increasingly hear from in the coming months. They and their arguments against independence (for they are never for the union) will become ever more desperate and hysterical. To a one, the incredibly lucrative livelihoods of these people will rely on the status quo continuing, as for their unaffected colleagues down south? That's exactly where they'll be, down south.

What horrifies me* is there could be a no vote by default. Scotland and all the people it contains from where ever they hail will have missed a golden opportunity because a majority of voters couldn't be arsed informing themselves. We have an opportunity to craft a nation to our own design, we can make sure we don't allow our institutions to grow so complacent they can spend hundred's of millions on crap art or hundred's of billions on weapons who's use would be unconscionable while we sit meekly by and tell ourselves 'this is how it is, how can we change it?'

Despite the fibs being told by comical Scottish 'Journalists', once people do look at the debate they move to a yes vote. It is a big step, no argument there; but if you're in a job you hate, that doesn't cover the bills or let you look after your family - you'd look for another job. Of course, you can't know for sure if it'll be perfect but you know the one you've got is definitely crap, so you'd go for it.

Wouldn't you?

This also horrified me. The eyes follow you... Worse than that? The image above could very well have been a preview for... THE FULL SIZE VERSION!


  1. Pa

    I agree with you in many ways, there is a total fear factor about who is going to be losing what esp Scottish based MPs (not sure the Darlings and Browns of the world actually represent Scotland). I also agree that the NO naysayers are starting to fall out and panic now that questions are actually getting asked, not enough but a start.

    Regarding Cameron I have had people say that he won't want to be known as the Prime Minister who saw the break up of Britain but I bet he won't mind being known as the Prime Minister who re-established England for Englanders.


  2. Yup.

    It seems to me as if rUK MP's are stepping back a bit while Scottish MP's and lords are stepping forward.

    Labour are the biggest losers I reckon, (the Libdems were fucked anyway as are the Tories in Scotland.)

    I think Westminster leaders will eventually adopt a magnanimous facade, Cameron will do his best to appear diplomatic, as if independence was his gift to give and as you say, he'll make a show of re-establishing England out of the UK (not sure where that leaves Wales and NI...)

    I wonder if a Westminster leader might stand up and use Scotland leaving as an excuse to dump nuclear weapons entirely and adopt a much reduced, non-empire-like stance in the international community. They could hold their hands up and blame it all on us.

  3. I've certainly been one of the people who has said that Cameron would be black affronted to lose Scotland. Just as King George was to lose the Americas.

    But maybe I'm wrong. After all, bit by bit in the 50s and 60s and into the 70s, they lost the empire, and then the Commonwealth then ceased to be the British Commonwealth, and these prime ministers lost no face.

    Maybe they will be glad to see the back of us, and think that they will be guaranteed pretty much a free reign to take England (and who cares about the Irish and Welsh) further and further right.

    I saw today that Osborne is threatening to come out of the EU if the City isn't allowed to go on being the most corrupt financial centre in the world.

    Apparently he wants to band together with other like minded countries... although I'd beware of banding together with the UK. As Charles De Gaulle warned...If you let the Brits in they want everything THEIR way, all the time.

    How wrong was he about that?

  4. The portrait of Diane Abbott is appalling. She's actually quite an attractive woman in a cuddly sort of way.

    This looks like a kid's daub.

    Also is it entirely appropriate for MPs to be painted giving the impression of wearing nothing.

    Next we'll have David Cameron in his skivvies.

    Incidentally, sorry if you just vomited on your keyboard...

  5. Unfortunately I can well imagine DC in his teamGB boxers, not a particularly edifying site.

    I always thought Diane Abbott was ok too (as a politician) when she got a sniff of a cabinet post she changed though...

    As I was writing the above drivel, I was trying to shoe horn in what I thought was the difference between proper old school unionists and the new crop of politicians - like Cameron or Osborne. As long as they can maintain their international standing, I don't think they care about Scotland. Also, although they absolutely won't say it, (although I rather suspect someone will eventually before Sept) they know as long as Scotland stays in a currency union and maintains good trading links and favourable conditions with things like water & power supply - not much actually will change.

    I do feel for people living in EWNI though, because I think WM will continue to battle their crappy economic problems by cracking down on people at the bottom of the pile.

    Its sort of what I was getting at above, apart from politicians with some weird sectarian axe to grind, daft BNP types or extreme EDL dafties - the only people who will still be fighting for Scotland to remain are those who'll get the heave-ho when we vote yes.


Thanks for comment as always and I apologise if you have to jump through any hoops to do so. Its just that, I'm still being spammed by organisations who are certain I can't get it up or when it is up its not big enough or that I don't have anyone to get it up for.

Who knew blogging could be so bad for ones self-confidence?