Wither the Union - through neglect, cowardice and appeasement

It's hard to choose between weeping and crying for the campaign to save the United Kingdom. The negative fear laden appeasement based campaign run by labour certainly deserves to lose based on how it had conducted itself. The positive case for Britain hasn't featured, but perhaps that's because it was conceded in 1997. John Major may well be proven right with his warning that we have 24 he's left to save the Union. Devolution conceded much of the ground, combined with the thinly disguised Anglophobia that the Scottish Lib Dems and Scottish Labour thought they could use to bloke the Conservatives from power for ever. But having unleashed that hateful demon they can no longer control their creation and if has become the unholy creator of the Nationalists. I could lay into the SNP here with their racist Anglophobic implications about Scots being the only ones who care, but I want to bemoan how the argument for the UK has been lost. Labour are primarily and chiefly to blame - with a side swipe at David Cameron for letting the bunch of numpties that are the Labour party in Scotland run anything. ( After all its not as if there isn't plenty of evidence of the mess they make from when they lead their party to destroy the UK economy under the previous government. )

For example Ed Miliband is today engadged in some soprt of Tory hating Dutch auction with the Nats today. What he doesn't get is when he boils the continuation of the United Kingdom to whether the Tories can be kept out he's effectively undermined the case for staying in. ( Yes the people of a future Scotland would have top learn that "The facts of life are essentially Tory" the hard way - which is why they can't understand that from the imature position of current Scottish only politics ).

No one has dared to stand up to the Nationalists and say - you know what there is something good about the Union, and a key part of that is the English. If you really can't get over the Mel Gibson historical fiction then go ahead and leave - because you don't deserve to be in this Union.

Instead we have yet more appeasement of separation from the supposed Unionist side - who are laying the foundations of their own eventual defeat.

Instead we should make a positive pro-Union case - with no bribery, or threats, for voting for it, and a take it or leave it message.

What the papers say

Most political parties and causes have a new paper that backs them.

Of course there are always links between the papers, their staff politicians and government.

We've had two declarations recently that are worthy of comment.

1) The Sunday Herald has come out for destroying the Union,
2) The Daily Express has turned back to supporting the European Union by embracing the Conservative party.

Of the two the Sunday Herald appears to be acting form principle - even if you disagree with their conclusion.

The Daily Express change of heart to suddenly producing 100% CCHQ propaganda is a little less admirable.

Things are running in opposite directions North and South of the boarder. North of the border those in the establishment are having to consider that just maybe the SNP will win and they won't want to be on the losing side. This means opinion could move in a jump, with many looking to back the winning side.

South of the boarder the establishment is pressing the panic button to do everything it can to undermine UKIP. They know that they will still be in power after May 22nd, but after the disgraceful smear campaign by all three main parties they are now trying to pretend that only the Conservative party can deliver.

Lets be clear anything less than a thumping UKIP victory on May 22nd will be used by the Conservatives to justify Cameron's aims of staying in the EU at any price.

Things are very unstable and that instability has two root causes:

1) Labour's anti-English Anglophobic devolution stitch up - dreamt up by Brown for his narrow partisan reasons.
2) Cameron failure of judgement in the terms of the Scottish referendum and failing to hold an EU referendum. ( He can plead all he likes about those nasty Quisling Lib Dems not letting him - but we know that iufg he believed in his country he'd have made it happen ).

Britain may be about to die - not that the papers care.

PS Do not rule out Brown declaring for independence in the last few weeks of the campaign.

September 19th - another possible future

Good morning. It was close, but the Union has held by just 998 votes. The result was in the balance until the last votes were counted - and then recounted three times.

This morning a tired Alex Salmond spoke to the SNP faithful a declared that this wasn't the end but just the beginning. He pointed out how much had been achieved in moving Scottish opinion and rededicated his government to working for Scotland's interests which he still believed would eventually be served by full independence. He declared that the government down in Westminster should accept that Scotland had shown a wish more more devolved powers, which he thought should include resources and taxation. There was a clear mandate from this referendum for these powers to be transferred, as Westminster would have discovered if Cameron had not blocked the Devo Max option from the referendum ballot.

If Westminster did not accept this then the Scottish government would include a referendum of Devo Max with the next elections for a Scottish Parliament.

Nick Clegg for the coalition announced a review of more powers to be devolved to Scotland, including the right to borrow money that will be ultimately underwritten by English tax payers ( though he neglected to mention the last part ).

Nicola Sturgeon stated that Westminster had to respond to Scotland's demands for more powers and rights, including keeping all North Sea oil revenues.

John Redwood wrote that it was time to give the English a fair deal in the Union, but his was a lone voice. Cameron is expected to make a speech at lunch time declaring his passionate belief in the Union and offering more powers and money to Scotland.

Only UKIP have the argument to keep the Union

The odd thing about the SNP's push for separating Scotland from the UK is there plan to surrender sovereignty as soon as possible to the EU afterwards.

The UK's current viting weight in the council of ministers is about 8%. Since Scotland is about a 1/10 of the population I assume ( but await the EU anaorak correction ) it will be less that 1% for Scotland.

The EU already has possention of the fish in UK (Scottish waters ) and is using the Macondo event in the Gulf of Mexico as an excuse to try to take control of Oil & Gas.

Now that majority voting is being used to dissolve the nation states Scotland faces a tragedy of the commons as the rest of the EU votes to take their resources.

So Alex Salmond's campaign for indepndence is in fact nothing of the sort.

There is only one political party that campaigns for independence ( for the UK ) and that's UKIP. The only political party with a positive message for the Union.

Denying Scots the vote

There are two articles in the MSM today (Little Scotland demands vote in independence poll - Telegraph , Who gets to vote - BBC) both addressing the anti-democratic plan to redefine UK citizens nationality without their consent - because its "impractical". ( I bet the SNP would have no problem answering the same question when handing out passports when it suites them - the little antidemocratic bigots ).

I've made the argument on twitter and in this blog that those who would be allowed or forced to take Scottish nationality should all vote - but the SNP knows that would lose them their referendum they've tried so hard to gerrymander.

Corby - home of many Scots in England - wants a vote, as do many other individuals. But what we see is the establishment's causal willingness to remove the franchise and fix questions that they claim to be putting to the public.

This bodes badly for any EU referendum and a likely post 2014 UK constitutional settlement.

PS I think the term Little Scotland is unfair when used to describe Corby - as the only real little Scotland exists between the ears of Alex Salmond.

By the way I'll be in Scotland watching the self obsessed Scottish media this week - especially the Glasgow Herald. 

Grubby constitutional deals done dirt cheap

So if it get Alex Salmond to lose the Scottish referendum in am manner that suits David Cameron 16 and 17 year old can have the vote, but potential Scottish Nationals living quite legally and honourably in the rest of the UK will be denied the vote.

Why because the SNP think more inexperienced voters will help their cause, where as those who understand the United Kingdom will hinder it. This is the low dirty standard to which the SNP operates.

But what of David Cameron and his Lib Dems friends ? They are willing to sell out both points as they are fairly sure the SNP are going to lose anyway, and they want full control over any British constitutional tidying up that comes afterwards. they certainly don't want the English Question getting even starker under another one sided anti-English devolution settlement that Devo Max ( or Independence Later ).

As the SNP will have to lose Alex Salmond (again ) sometime shortly ) and the rest of the political talent is pretty low grade this is no doubt seen as the high tide of Independence sentiment, and if basic constitutional principles like the age of franchise have to be traded for narrow sectarian advantage then so be it.

Its dirty, cynical and treats the United Kingdom and its peoples with utter contempt.

The Glasgow Rangers fiasco

So what we've learnt is that Scottish football is willing to cut off its nose to spite its face.

The animosity, some of it sectarian, is a wonder to behold. As a result Scottish football will be robbed of a large amount of income and the world looks on in wonder.

Alex Salmond has a problem here also. What if the only thing Scots can agree on is that Westminster and the evil English are the glue that holds Scotland together ? If they can't run a football league without letting petty jealousies and vindictive revenge , what can they run ?

( In fairness the same question can be levelled at the civil service down here as the omni-shamles comes to 2012 .)

Appeasement just makes the beast hungry

You'd think this message would have been burnt into the minds of our politicians.

Its one of the earliest lessons of English history. Paying the Danegeld just gets you more Danes with menaces back in a few years.

Sacrificing Czechoslovakia doesn't buy peace, it guarantees war.

For a while the democracies learnt this lesson and Lady Thatcher and President Regan faced down the evil empire of socialism and freed half of Europe.

But with Scottish separatism the lesson was forgotten.

The SNP aren't to blame here - though the swamp of Scottish nationalism has some unpleasant undercurrents, creatures, pools of Anglophobia and views in it.

It was Labour and the Lib Dems who thought playing with the Union would let them get back at Thatcher. So for narrow partisan advantage they played up to the separatism and broke the Union with the rabidly anti-English devolution betrayal of the Union. ( Yes it was Labour that brought this to pass - but the Lib Dems where key partners in crime here ). They thought they could rule Scotland for ever and that appeasing the nationalist beast would stop it in its tracks.

How misguided they were. ( Though lets face it since Labour has been wrong about almost every major decision in politics its not a surprise ).

Now a SNP Scottish Executive ( which the government lacks the guts to call it its legal name ) plays up on grievances, and plans an emotional referendum and Westminster has suddenly realised perhaps they could lose it. ( Though of course no one is offering Scotland independence, but really Greek style rule from Brussels ).

Appeasement has been a disaster - again.

But also the mold of the UK has been broken. As I have said on other forums before only a federal UK can be stable and that requires an English Parliament that contains an English Executive.

Nothing else can prevent the inevitable break up of the UK under the unjust partisan botched job that Labour created when they started the break up of the Union with devolution.

Though perhaps the break up of the UK and its hated citizens with their conservative values was Labour and Lib Dems idea all along, to deliver the home nations in bite sized chunks to the EU.

Time to turn devolution into federalism

So for St Andrew's day we have the announcement of some more financial powers for the Scottish devolved executive and its regional council parliament.

But surely logic demands that the devolved governments should have responsibility for raising all the cash they spend, otherwise devolution will continue as a parasitic exercise bleeding the English dry.

There will be some debate as the SNP is really pursuing its goal of turning Scotland into a PIGS basket case and will never stop asking for more powers until there are none left or given away to Brussels. And of course as we are finding out yet again the English tax payer still has to fund out the Celtic fringe even when its been granted independence ( see our second bailout of the southern Irish state ).

Better that this is all done on a formal and equal basis, and overseen by the grown ups who will end up paying anyway ( ie the English ).

So how about a federal UK with division of powers and financial responsibilities clearly and fairly laid out. That means an English Parliament and an English government. But then we almost have those right now - its just no one dares say so.

A bit of honesty, clear thinking, and straight talking is needed.

Will the Scottish "Nation" get to vote on independance or just those who live there ?

Since the SNP seems to still be gearing up for an independence vote I've been doing a little thinking.

With the devolved assemblies its been a fairly logical choice about who votes in their elections, those people who live in the geographical locations to be administered, easy.

But what of a referendum on Scottish Independence ?

An independent Scotland would have direct affect on the nationality of more than the people who live there.

My wife is Scottish, but she lives in Surrey. Should she get a vote ? I would argue yes, she's as Scottish as Alex Salmond is, and has probably spent less time in England than he has.

I've heard various estimates of the number of Scots in England, but somewhere between 2 and 5 million must be about right. They would all be eligible for Scottish nationality and could lose British nationality - so logically they must be allowed a vote.

Even worse - there will be many UK citizens married to Scots, who could also take up Scots nationality and should perhaps also vote. Though Alex I could be persuaded to reduce my tax bill by granting you your "Freedom(TM Mel Gibson)".

My guess is that this approach kills Scots Independence stone dead.

What's odd is that the Unionists parties don't pursue it, or perhaps some of them are not as opposed to breaking up the Union as they claim ?

England - Saving Scotland's banks and delaying independence

It is perhaps interesting to note what has happened and how it may impact politics.

The two remaining major independent banks in Scotland, HBOS and RBS, have been saved from ruin, mostly by the English tax payers, their children, their chidlrens children and their pensions.

I personally wonder if HBOS will need to be taken over by Lloyds TSB now these credit guarantees and sources of capital are in place.

There are now two candidates to buy HBOS - Lloyds TSB and the UK Govt ( ie mostly the English Govt ). I wonder how long it will take for that penny to drop. Once it does the pressure for the socialist government to buy with English tax payers money will become very high. Is there a by-election coming soon ? Surely not ....

But what this also does is blow a hole below the water line in the SNP's campaign for independence.

Lets be clear - if Scotland was independent now its choices would be a stark as Iceland's, ie who to sell your country to. ( The Icelandics look like going for the Russians ).

At the same time oil heads below $100/bbl and production from the North Sea continues its sharp decline.

There will also have been a body blow to confidence North of the Boarder.

All it takes is Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling to bring home a bucket load of English pork, which would very obviously not be available for an independent in the EU Scotland.

Oddly enough I suspect this will play well for the Unionist parties, and a future Conservative governemnt will reduce the pressure for political representation in England.

So will the Union be saved ? Ultimately I doubt it as by removing the external pressures our short term self intrested politicians have been prevented from coming to a positive vision of a future fair UK based on equality between nations, and that means at the next crisis the Union may break.

PS I now wonder if Labour won't win the Glenrothes by-election. If something on HBOS was pulled out of the hat - perhaps they will. English tax payers should weep...

See also A Free Scotland would still have to beg for English cash Angus McLeod
and I think Richard Thomson of the SNP is going to take another view...

Calls for England to get a vote

Tim Luckhurst - The Times 7 May 2008
John Redwood - blog 7 May 2008
And this blog also - 5 May 2008
Wonkotsane - The CEP Blog - 2 May 2008
Sepoy agent -blog - 9May2008

Anywhere else ?

Who votes for Scotland ?

If there is to be a referendum of independence for the location of Scotland - who should the electorate include ?

1) Just those UK citizens on the electoral roll in Scotland ?
2) Only people who would wish to be Scottish Citizens on the electoral roll in Scotland ?
3) All those people who would/could become Scottish Citizens if Scotland was to separate ?

With the Scottish Parliament it has clearly be seen as 1). But I would argue that natural justice requires that for the separation from the UK 3) is required.

Of course this choice will probably determine the result .....

The Conservative party should support referendums on independence

I believe it is a mistake for the Unionists to try to deny the referendum on Scottish independence that the SNP say they are seeking.

Since consent should be at the heart of the United Kingdom, it is not pro-independence to affirm it. It actually damages the UK in the long term to be seen to be running away from it. ( They same applies for our relationship with the EU - as Ming Campbell to his credit finally realised.)

The Conservative party should promise referendums on the following:

1) Membership of the UK for each constituent nation, with a new federated constitution between the nations being offered.
2) Membership of the EU. ( If anyone leaves the UK then they can sort out 1) for themselves).

It should be understood that these referendums will be final for the next 50 years - and laws passed to ensure this.

They should take place about 2 years after the next general election to give full time for debate to develop.

These are not measures we should hide from. What we need to avoid is the exam retake options that Quebec keeps trying. These issues should be settled.

Lets bring the issue to a head

As David Cameron has said there is no reason why Scotland could not prosper as an independent nation. Personally I think we're better of together, but not under the coercion that many in Scotland feel. So if you agree sign up for the e-petition for a referendum on Scottish independence ( and also of course English independence ! ).

Gordon Brown wants to try to dismiss England as "The British Regions" - lets show him how shaky the ground he stands on is.