Prime Minister of the UK, of which Scotland is a part. Said:
“I don’t have a vote in this. It is for Scots to decide and that is where the debate should take place.”Why then, are Westminster cabinet ministers coming to Scotland to brief against independence? I know Yes Scotland like to say the referendum is about everyone in Scotland - I don't think they meant transient Tory Ministers up for the day.
Meanwhile - William Hague during his visit to Scotland...
 |
| 1977, 16 year old William Hague gave a speech at Tory Conference (held that year at Hogwarts) that Margaret Thatcher described as 'thrilling'. (Information provided for context...) |
 |
| As he is today. |
"I think it is a more immediately, dramatically uncertain world if Scotland were to vote to separate itself from the UK this coming year because what we are trying to achieve by 2017 is a reformed EU that we can recommend the whole of the UK stays in."Going on to flap out:
"Scotland in effect is going to have two referendums on whether to leave the EU and one of them is in September.People should be in no doubt, if part of a member state leaves the EU it has to reapply for membership and that will be a process of uncertain length and unknown outcome in terms of the terms that are negotiated and probably great cost. It means paying more to get less from the EU."Scotland will have two referenda on EU membership according to Hague - only the one in September will count though. The one 'planned' by the Tories for 2017 would see Scotland dragged which ever way England wanted to go. What is entirely lost on so many of these zombie-politicians coming up from Westminster, is that only with independence will votes cast in Scotland count for anything, voting no maintains an English veto on Scottish voter's wishes.
Ironically, on behalf of the UK - the-bits-that-normally-vote-Tory-but-might-vote-UKIP anyway - the unctuous Mr Hague wants to fix a 'democratic deficit' between the UK & EU while maintaining a democratic deficit within the UK itself.
We've had Phillip Hammond (Secretary of Defence) up telling us we won't be able to recruit people into a Scottish Defence Force just before going back down south to make thousands of soldiers redundant - in some cases just days before they would qualify for their full military pension. Not to mention the number of defence personnel working in Scotland in the first ten years of this century falling by 27% compared to 11% in the rest of the UK. Add to that the notion - Scotland pays close to £4 billion as its per-head share of UK defence spending yet only half of it is spent in Scotland.
(For more info click here.)
David Cameron himself paid Scotland a visit last year to big-up defence jobs in Scotland, he told us:
"Scotland counts for more on the world stage because it is part of the United Kingdom and Scottish defence jobs are more secure as part of the United Kingdom."Presumably in keeping with his views on Scottish independence being an issue for Scots to decide but deploying the 'in Scotia' caveat (which I've just made up.) Funnily enough, six months later, BAE got rid of 834 defence jobs in Scotland, as a stronger more secure part of the UK you understand.
And there's the point about David Cameron refusing to go head-to-head with anyone in a TV debate but saying:
“We debate these things in parliament and we debate them in the media."Pretty sure television makes up a good part of the media.
David Cameron's head must be spinning like a top. He won't engage in a TV debate because its for Scots to decide but will send various ministers to Scotland to, ummm, engage in debate. He won't debate with Alex Salmond on TV because it is a Scottish issue and in any case, he (Cameron) debates in parliament - with 643 MP's backing him up and 9 against, (I've included Plaid Cymru.) He'll also argue against independence 'in the media' (although its still a matter for Scots to decide) but not on the telly with Alex Salmond.
It seems its only a matter for Scots to decide if we're talking about David Cameron in a TV debate with Alex Salmond, and that Westminster politicians temporarily in Scotland can say what they like then scuttle back down south to Westminster wailing; 'its for Scots in Scotland to decide...'
If he's so sure the union is as fucking fantastic as Better Together tells us it is - why all this subterfuge and hesitation?
It goes without saying, what ever your views on Scotland and EU membership, the only way they can be heard is with independence. English voters have as much right to express their democratic voice unhindered by Scottish wishes, as we do unhindered by theirs.
Equally, if you're not a fan of the EU, if we get a Yes vote we'll be chucked out. Although according to some, Scotland isn't a member and couldn't be chucked out of something its not in. I'm being disingenuous, its in the EU, it just isn't a member-state - the UK is the member-state and although Scotland is a country in the UK and the UK is in the EU - Scotland wouldn't be in the EU if it left the UK because it would then be a region, or its a region now, or we'd forget how to negotiate... Or something.
I think Mr Hague wants to have his Hokey Cokey and eat it.
 |
| William Hague's notes for his speech about Scotland and EU membership. |
I for one am heart-grateful for politicians like William Hague taking the time to visit and explain all this, I'm sure I speak for absolutely no one at all (including myself) when I say - Thanks a bunch William.
I can almost hear the plaintiff lament interwoven with the scream of the train's whistle as it speeds past Berwick upon Tweed...
'...its for Scots in Scotland to decide...'
Simples.
ReplyDeleteMr Hague is hosting a massive conference to get countries to agree that it's downright horrible that soldiers rape women in war zones.
He’s right, of course. It is.
He thinks this conference of his is going to stop them doing it.
He seems not to be aware, and why would he be, never having been a soldier, that soldiers have been raping and pillaging since ever there were soldiers and possibly even before.
It's not nice; it's bloody horrible...but then again, so is war. I mean it's no bloody picnic getting your legs blown off, if for example you are a little lad living in, let's say Baghdad, and some allied bomber, aiming for Saddam, hits your house instead. Not a lot of fun being left an orphan either... Still, strangely Mr Hague isn’t going to have a conference about that.
He seems to be minded to stop the rapes, but not the wars... well, given that England manufactures loads of weapons and sells them to distasteful dictatorships, which then use them on their own people... why would he want to stop the wars? It would fuck up England’s major export business and leave his mate Dave the spiv with sod all to do when he went on his foreign tours.
No no. Wars are good and must be allowed to continue. But soldiers must learn to act like…well gentlemen.
Anyway, this awesome conference which won't cost too many millions of pounds for him to stage in London (bringing a lot of spending to London, and absolutely sod all to anywhere else) means to put all this right.
So in future, when a soldier, sex starved but victorious in war, is contemplating rape, he will remember that a little bald garden gnome with a grating monotone of a voice and a cute chauffeur, has said it’s not on.
Clearly however, it is only possible for Scotland to feel that it has been a part of this achievement if it doesn’t leave the union. Because clearly no one would want to come to Edinburgh for a few days’ conferencing. I mean, sod all shopping in Edinburgh!
I welcome these Tories coming to Scotland to talk shit. It reminds everyone just how repugnant they are close up. Even worse than on telly. And it gives us all a chance to laugh at them playing at being world statesmen.
I expect Hague’s speech and his plans for the conference were drawn up before America dropped the bombshell that unless they smartened up and spent more money on weaponry they were off the president’s Christmas card list.
Stupid little shits.
Its an excellent point you make re. war and rape. I suppose it depends on what papers you read and what you choose to believe more generally, but to posit the notion that GB is some sort of world-sized moral barometer - to my mind anyway - is utter pish.
ReplyDeleteWhich isn't to say Britain does nothing good, it does, it gives tons of money to charity, unfortunately so much of the intent is hijacked by morally bankrupt psychopathic tory ministers in trying to link their foreign policies to the good intentions of ordinary Brits (in the geographic sense.)
I have no doubt, Hague will stand up at his seminar and decry war-rape (what a horrid phrase) is wrong - he may even go on to denounce war generally but it'll be a two faced lie.
Westminster's remaining tendril of morality is a stretched as tight the shiny skin that coats David Cameron's forehead.
'Fraid you got it wrong. Cameron's shock troops aren't sent North to take part in the debate. To do that they would have to publicise their appearances and address the public in general.
ReplyDeleteWhat they sleekit beasties do is sneak in under the radar and address audiences which have been vetted to exclude anyone showing symptoms of the Nationalist virus.
That is not debate it's simply a staged press conference with a compliant media drooling on every word.
Debate requires a minimum of two parties with differing views on a subject.
Boorach.
ReplyDeleteCan't argue with that, although describing Alistair Carmichael as a 'shock troop' is a total stretch.
Listening to him is like being attacked by a totally crap womble.
Even the WM leader debates they did were choreographed, I really enjoyed the Sturgeon/Sarwar debate and the Sturgeon/Carmichael rout come to think of it, it was proper gritty stuff.
I know some folk found it unedifying, I didn't. When was the last time we saw a political debate so lively and passionate and in Sarwar's case, so full of shit?
(Sorry Daily Mail, don't doorstep me, I have no comment. ;-)