On this page:

We trust the people of Scotland to make the right decisions and ask other parties to do the same.

Bruce Crawford, Minister for Parliamentary Business

Friday, November 30, 2007

The online conversation is undoubtedly off to a flying start.

Bruce Crawford Minister for Parliamentary BusinessThe 1,000th comment in the National Conversation Blog was posted at 7.26am on Saturday morning. And the conversation continues to grow and expand in new places with the First Minister speaking to a packed out audience at Edinburgh's International Book Festival, radio phone ins and newspaper letters pages fill up with the views of the nation.

It seems that articulating debate on our constitutional future is hugely popular with a poll in a Sunday newspaper this weekend showing that 74 per cent of Scots are in favour of a referendum with the majority believing that Scotland becoming Independent in inevitable.

The Scottish Government envisages a national conversation which will consider the entire range of possible improvements to the current constitutional settlement for Scotland. What is clear is that the status quo is no longer an option and the question now is how much more Independence and responsibility the people of Scotland want to help improve and progress our country? For instance, I want Scotland to have the Independence to decide whether the Trident Nuclear Weapons System should continue to be based on the Clyde.

At the election a few months back all the main political parties made proposals concerning the devolution settlement.

In addition to proposing a white paper on independence which we have now published, the Scottish National Party made specific proposals to extend the devolution settlement in areas such as the civil service, broadcasting and for firearms.

The Scottish Liberal Democrats proposed a new constitutional convention to examine the best way to devolve new responsibilities, including taxation, to Holyrood. They also proposed that competence over the electoral system, energy, transport and marine policy should be devolved.

The Scottish Labour party emphasised the continued use of the mechanisms in the Scotland Act to make any necessary changes. The Scottish Conservatives declared themselves open to a debate about the powers of the Scottish Parliament to secure accountability for raising revenues, as well as for spending.

Since we launched the national conversation many politicians have joined the debate, with some rethinking their position and saying they welcome a fresh look at Scotland's partnership with other parts of the UK. Certainly times change and minds change, and what is important is that Scotland's government encourages the debate and enables political parties, groups and individuals who have a view of the future direction our nation to play a full part in the conversation.

At the end of the day whether the people of Scotland choose full self government as the way forward or seek to obtain new devolved powers for the Scottish Parliament no significant change should be allowed to happen without the consent of the people, that is why we so strongly back the idea of a referendum. We trust the people of Scotland to make the right decisions and ask other parties to do the same.

Before the election we said to Scotland that it was now time to move forward. As we approach our first 100 days of an SNP Government we have done just that by getting on with the job of delivering the SNP programme and fulfilling our commitment to ensure that a full and proper debate setting out how we can choose a new and better relationship with the other nations of these islands takes place. I look forward to the conversation flowing!

This blog is now closed to further comments.

Comments

[Latest First] | [Earliest First] Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]

  • 51. jack colquhoun - Cowdenbeath

    Saturday, August 25, 2007 15:15

    Aye it's me again urging all who have and those who have not to join in and engage their opinions on this national conversation.
    I must add aye agree with the posting which asks what else is being done to move this conversation on.Well Alex & Co let's see what That great Media tool T.V. has to offer.Maybe through course chosen posting subscribers might be given the chance to warm the seats in oor expensive parliament building and live audience to the gallery in a 1st Hollyrood people's Conversation.A Scottish Item with 21st Century viewing,utilising the licence fee for the benefit of the holder????
    There seems to be a more than positive feel inside and outside this cyber forum.Some have asked me on the streets what difference will it make,to which my obvious reply can only be" None if you don't bother to engage in the conversation,don't be left out have your say or get informed?"
    Too many of us will be left sitting on the fence with little or no pickings left to salvage with our own failure not to engage.
    At long last we have a Governing Body willing to stimulate the minds of those who count,ne'er a Gvt forgeting how they got where they are to forget those who got them there??
    So again Escotia's ain kinsmen,that Great wee Country of Multicultural Unity let's talk so The SNP can ACT on oor behalf to move Scotland Forward an' oot O' This Limbo state we've been left in by previous administrations.

  • 52. livilion - livingston

    Saturday, August 25, 2007 17:19

    #18. Simon Fotherington - Glasgow
    Wednesday, August 22, 2007 15:30

    I agree.
    Have the option to retain the status quo or revert back to the old system.

    Feel free to campaign for it too.

    I think UKIP and the BNP came to Scotland with Scottish sounding candidate's names to campaign on a return to Westminster ticket back in May.
    Labour in Scotland campaigned for the status quo.

    That's why Alex Salmond is now the First Minister of Scotland, that's how attractive we Scots found those two options.

    In a democracy its everyone's right to make a chorus and verse of himself.

    Feel free brother, you do what you gotta do.


  • 53. Alison Bennett - Australia

    Saturday, August 25, 2007 18:24

    I am an Australian, but I still support this proposal for Scottish independence, it seems to have been a long time coming. One question though - why would you think that you can be 'independent' with a person born into power as your head of state? Why not go for real independence?
    Good luck!

  • 54. David Comerford - Edinburgh

    Saturday, August 25, 2007 21:10

    The question is surely "why wouldn't Scotland be better off as an independent country?", given the following:
    1. Assume that the English (& Welsh & NIrish) are not genetically superior to the Scots (but clever Scots may move to London).
    2. Note that there is no relationship whatever between country size (population) and GDP per capita (using data UNDP 2006 Human Development Report)
    3. Note that there is a strong relationship between proximity to a nation's capital, and regional income per capita.

    Thus, there is no right or wrong size for a country, but within a country, income inevitably becomes centralised if politics is centralised. Total GDP is therefore unaffected by splitting countries up, but the distribution of GDP is.

    Thus, for any peripheral region, income will tend to be increased by getting independence.

    Thus, since Scotland is peripheral to London, ceteris paribus, Scotland will be richer if it gets independence.

  • 55. Johnny Englander - Banbury, England

    Saturday, August 25, 2007 22:24

    I have read a lot of very provocative posts here about England and the English people.

    Just remember that if you are independent you will have a much larger, much richer and much more populated country still there over the border.

    Except we're not going to be very happy at having had the union thrown back in our faces.

  • 56. Robert Seaton - Edinburgh

    Saturday, August 25, 2007 23:35

    Bruce Crawford says in this post:
    "At the end of the day whether the people of Scotland choose full self government as the way forward or seek to obtain new devolved powers for the Scottish Parliament no significant change should be allowed to happen without the consent of the people, that is why we so strongly back the idea of a referendum. We trust the people of Scotland to make the right decisions and ask other parties to do the same."

    I hope that this is an error. It certainly does not represent the policy of the SNP as it went into the last election. The 1997 referendum was sufficient mandate for the devolution settlement presently in operation, and that settlement included the power of ministers by order, with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and Houses of Commons and Lords, to remove reservations on the powers of the Scottish Parliament. There is no requirement, neither a moral requirement nor a requirement of party policy, to hold a referendum on extending the powers of the Scottish Parliament, and I can see no reason that would justify repeating the expense. A referendum is plainly necessary for Scotland to become independent, but nothing short of that requires a referendum - assent has already been given by the people to devolution.

  • 57. John - Falkirk

    Sunday, August 26, 2007 08:18

    Since a young boy I have prayed for these days to come. The shackles are beginning to be loosened, self respective in our country and as Scots is growing. Lets not loose this great opportunity.The genie is out of the bottle and will be difficult to get back in.Once we begin to taste this growing respect in ourselves as Scots, our confidence as a nation and as citizens of this great country will grow. For what we have achieved as a race and what we have given to the world, we should be holding our heads up high and proudly saying we are Scots, not being self critical and apologetic. We still have a long way to go, but we know that by doing what is best for Scotland but continuing to look outwards and working along with our friends in England, Wales, Ireland and other countries throughout the world, that we can achieve something real and so worthwhile for our children. We are living through exciting times. Our children will not excuse us if we fail to seize this great opportunity. Going back to a country run by party yes men is no longer an option.

  • 58. David Robertson - Inverness

    Sunday, August 26, 2007 11:51

    Sooner or later, if our heart yearns to be free, we come to the point reached by the little boy with the red wagon. That is, we discover that the toughest resistance to seeking what it means to be truly free, then dedicating one's life to winning that freedom is not from without, but from within.

    The little boy loved to play with his little red wagon. But one day it suddenly occurred to him that he could not recall ever seeing an adult playing with a little red wagon. The moment that thought struck him he burst into tears. His mother was finally able to get out of him what it was that was causing such terrible grief. He sobbed through his tears that he didn’t want to grow up because he was afraid that then he wouldn’t be able to play with his little red wagon. His mother encouraged him as best she could. She assured him that as far as she knew there was no reason why he should not play with his little red wagon after he grew up, if he wanted to. No one would prevent him. That cheered him up a bit. But after a few minutes he burst out crying again. When she asked him what the trouble was this time, he sobbed, “I’m afraid I won’t want to!”

    "A! Freedom is ane nobil thing!
    Freedom makis man to have liking,
    Freedom all solace to man givis:
    He livis at ease that freely livis!
    A nobil hart may hae naen ease,
    Na ellis nocht that may him pleise,
    Gif freedom failye; for free liking
    Is yairnit owre all other thing."

    from The Brus by John Barbour (c1320-1395), Archbishop of Aberdeen, Poet.


  • 59. jimi - Kirkcudbright

    Sunday, August 26, 2007 12:53

    Referendum please, let the people decide not the politicians.

  • 60. livilion - livingston

    Sunday, August 26, 2007 17:26

    55. Johnny Englander - Banbury, England
    Saturday, August 25, 2007 22:24

    ""...Just remember that if you are independent you will have a much larger, much richer and much more populated country still there over the border.

    Except we're not going to be very happy at having had the union thrown back in our faces...""

    Richer? A larger cash flow does not actually equate to richer.
    Ten times more money with ten times the committments.
    Head for head England is no better off than Scotland, and without us might be considerably poorer if not careful.

    The Union is not going to be thrown at anyone, it is going in the bin.

    England gets her own independence the same day that Scotland does.

    Scotland will be independent, England will get used to the idea and get on with it, just as she did with Hong Kong,India and Pakistan, Ireland, South Africa, Rodesia, Kenya, Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand and probably a hundred others.

    England gained an empire by throwing her weight about the world.
    Those days are gone now and in the past they must remain.

    The UK is too small and too fragile an economic body to protect Scottish interests in the global market, remember the ERM and Black Wednesday?

    Our future lies with the EU and to get the most out of it Scotland must retake control of her own affairs from Westminster.

    Face it the only time the Union ever worked for Scotland as a part of the UK was for just over half a century from the Victorian era up until WWI.
    The rest of the time it has just cost us to be a part of it.
    From the mid 70's it has really cost us Big Time.

    Don't take it personally, it's not you it's us, we just need to have time away from you to find our own way.

    We can still be friends.

    If your last comment was an attempt veiled threat, I'd suggest you cast your mind back to Whitehall's experiences in Ulster.

    In the realpolitik Scotland shares a great deal of her political and human DNA with the Irish, and her friends are also our friends.

    NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT.

[Latest First] | [Earliest First] Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]

Page updated: Tuesday, May 13, 2008