On this page:

The people are sovereign. The Scottish Parliament is their Parliament.

National Conversation with Scotland's Institutions

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

First Minister Alex Salmond

As First Minister of Scotland, it is my responsibility to lead discussion and debate on how we can build a more successful Scotland.

This Government believes that independence for Scotland - where we are equal partners with the other nations of these islands - offers the best prospects for growing prosperity in our nation.

I have already said as First Minister that I am happy to test support for enhanced devolution in a referendum, along with Independence.

And I say to those who oppose the restoration of Scottish independence that just as I respect absolutely their right to hold that view, so in return I feel able to require of them a clear alternative which can be put on a ballot paper and held up to public scrutiny.

I say that not as a nationalist, but as a democrat.

The people are sovereign. The Scottish Parliament is their Parliament. The right to choose the future for this country, is their right.

This second phase of the National Conversation is focused on extensive engagement with Scotland's civic institutions who have developed and preserved our society for over 300 years. We have the chance to shape the future of the nation - and it is important that civic Scotland plays a central role.

On a simple level, the institutions - charities, churches, universities, business and the unions - are the main voice of Scottish society. Their members help to shape the opinions that impact across the wider public.

Institutions act as an important interlocutor between the government and the citizen. In a fundamental sense they are Scottish society - and have been so for many centuries.

This is a debate where Scotland's civic institutions can and must play a vital role - in defining the choices and the challenge that we face as a society.

We must take full responsibility for shaping our own future - the future of Scotland. So consider the aspects of Scottish life which could be made better. Be confident in asserting your vision.

To our churches and our faith groups I say, if you care passionately about a humanitarian global role for Scotland, if you care strongly about increasing foreign aid, if you object deeply to the presence of nuclear weapons - then tell us, and tell the people of Scotland.

To our voluntary organisations I say, if you are paying the cost of lottery funding being diverted to London - then speak out. Tell us the progress you wish to see.

And our universities and colleges, seeking more funding but constrained by Scotland's funding structure. The same fiscal straitjacket which constrains Scotland's government - and which constrains our choices as a society.

And our business organisations who want to enhance the competitive advantage of the Scottish economy and recognise that is the root to prosperity, then we should consider the new wealth - the new resources - that Scotland could generate with greater control of our own economy.

To our trade unions, we have to consider what social partnerships are required to create not just a rich country but a rich society.

As we have seen throughout our history, often the biggest steps forward, the most significant progress requires the greatest courage and indeed, often, some plain speaking.

The Scottish Government wants to hear from you about your priorities and ambitions.

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] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]

  • 201. fedup - Glasgow

    Sunday, May 25, 2008 22:08

    I see people here saying that only 15% voted SNP. I don't think that would be a fair indication of who would turn out to vote for an independent Scotland. Many people vote tactically and I myself have done that in the past. People in Scotland will take the labour option rather than vote for SNP and maybe let the tories in, we all know this, and believe me I'm not politically minded. I'm just tired of the whole Scotland/Britain thing. I say we put it to the test with a referendum and see just how many Scots will turn up on voting day, I think you will find that people who normally wouldn't vote, would turn up on that day. It's ridiculous that we are at the mercy of Westminster and it's ridiculous for any Scot to want to stay that way forever.

    An independent Scotland is the only way for us, I'm so tired of being England's poor relation and the subject of all Westminsters tests, we always do everything a year ahead of the English. We are the reluctant scapegoats for everything.

    Alex, come on, what's keeping you? Let's get this show on the road. We need this NOW not in a few years. How can I help?

  • 202. Alice Johansson - Seattle USA

    Tuesday, May 27, 2008 11:33

    My Dearest Alex,

    I'm afraid your constant sabre rattling is making this ex-pat Scot cringe with alarm. You are creating barriers where none existed before and pandering to every stereotype and perceived grievance that too-many whinging Scots have been moaning about since records began. Westminster has not, does not and will not stop Scotland in reaching its full potential. Narrow mindedness, petty arguments and perceived wrongs have done that all by themselves. If you want to know why Scotland is the poor man of the West, why don't you look in the mirror?

    Nothing will change in an independent Scotland. As a nation, our psyche has always been defined by a massive chip on our collective shoulders because our identity is entirely based on our ‘relationship of grievance’ against England. Never mind the not too shabby fact that this perception is a fallacy but why break the habit of a life time?

    This will not change with independence. our collective paranoia, parochialness and narrow mindedness will be compounded when our ‘leaders’ suddenly realise that any power, influence or leverage that we had with the union is gone in a post-independence world where we are but one of many small and powerless countries. I wonder what would happen then? Why, we would blame everyone else of course, after all, independence would not be on our terms. As soon as our country declares banana republic status, every warship, plane, laptop, desk chair and every other resource paid by Mr and Mrs British taxpayer will be relocated down south. And who could blame them. I wouldn’t. So how do we start off our new nation? Why the same way we started off the last one, with a grievance that will shape and hinder our national identity and development in exactly the same way it has done before. Grow up Scotland, the rest of the UK will survive just fine without you, much to Mr Salmond’s annoyance.

    May I suggest Alex, that if you want to run something that’s small, powerless and blames everyone else for their problems, perhaps who should run for President of the UN?

    Regards, Alice.

  • 203. Lucy - Fife

    Tuesday, May 27, 2008 20:28

    I feel terribly bad that the whole independence debate paints Scotland in a such bad light. It screams opportunism...

    We were quite happy to profit from the proceeds of the British Empire - no complaints then. Our facories export their wares all accross the empire. Our ships sail the high seas and English money builds our infrastructure and our welfare state.

    But then things change. The empire is gone and Britain is bankrupted having willingly sacrificed her empire and her balance sheet to preserve the very freedoms that we here today take for granted.

    Our manufacturing sector dies, despite government attempts to salvage it by nationalisation. The fact is, the Koreans do it better, faster and cheaper. Its not just Scotland that suffers, but the whole of the UK as well - destroying the arguement that Scotland was unfairly treated. There's no shipyards in Newcastle is there?

    But then salvation! We find oil. Now suddenly, the SNP emerge from nowhere with their campaign of 'Its Scotlands oil!' And they're right. It is ours, so we plan a new future, with our resources at our disposal. Its almost as is if we've got a better offer and now we turn our back on the very thing that protected our freedoms in the first place. I would call that opportunism in the extreme.

    Now picture the scene in 20 years. The UK (now free of Scotland) has found huge quantities of oil and natural gas in UK territorial waters off the Falklands, St Helena, Pitcairn and Ascenion Island. London is awash with petro dollars thanks to the UK Geological Survey proving that the sea shelves extended under the sea from overseas territories (they submitted their findings to the UN today btw).

    Of course, in 20 years the North Sea oil has run out and Scotland is facing a similar downturn...I wonder if there would be similar debate as to re-join the union. Opportunism in the extreme!

  • 204. Scott - Central Scotland

    Wednesday, May 28, 2008 23:04

    "National Conversation"?

    Going through the comments it seems like around half a dozen people having their own wee conversation.

    If Scotland goes on it's own who will the Nationalists blame when things go wrong or hit the buffers? Oh yeah, Brussels!

  • 205. david ramsay - renfrewshire

    Saturday, May 31, 2008 18:27

    Personally I feel that independence would be a political distaste for Scotland. For nearly 300 years we have been part of a very successful Union and like any other partnership there ave been good & bad times.

    Together we are stronger. I will never support independence.

  • 206. DaveyMac - Web

    Saturday, May 31, 2008 19:52

    Some interesting posts and several from those who appear to have many misconceived ideas on independence.

    3 obvious Facts:
    Scotland is a Country.
    Nearly all countries govern themselves.
    We would not be 'alone' if we were to govern ourselves just as the UK and any other state is not 'alone' today.

    If Scotland wants to keep sovereignty to another political state, then that State needs to be offering us clear advantages for giving up our sovereignty.

    So we should not even question the benefits of autonomy since the entire world is in agreement that that is what works best - self governance.

    There are very few union benefits that we cannot do better ourselves. The BIGGEST benefit is supposedly that the Union give Scotland a seat at the top table in the Security Council, EU, UN etc.

    Lets examine this.
    What does the UK do that is in our interests and with our voice in international and UK national affairs.

    Trident on the Clyde. Scots do not want this - we get it.
    Fishing industry sold down the river - EU negotiation 100% not in our interests.
    War in Iraq - Scots did not want this and would not have taken part in such a unilateral and illegal move.

    So the UK state adds our weight to things we are completely against.

    Disagree?
    Name something the UK has fought for internationally or nationally to the benefit of Scots over another part of the UK?

    Do not mention the Scottish parliament - something the UK delayed using undemocratic means for decades.

  • 207. John Murphy - Paisley -

    Monday, June 2, 2008 11:48

    206. DaveyMac - Web
    You mention some very relevent points but perhaps they have been misconceived in terms of their relationship to the independence agenda.

    In terms of the UK government 'stopping' the development of a Scottish parliament, perhaps you may recall that a devolution referendum was run in the 1970's with the Scottish people having an opportunity to vote for their own parliament.

    In terms of the UK standing up for Scottish interests, perhaps you should be aware of that the Westminster department - the DCMS (Department of Culture Media and Sport) - fully supported and gave credance to, Glasgows commonwealth games bid. Or perhaps we could look at the UK signing the anti-cluster bombs treaty, something that the SNP have constantly harked on about. Or perhaps we could look to the example of Westminster redefining the boundries of the North Sea petrochemical zones so that now 90% of the UK zone now lies in Scottish waters. Maybe we could also point to Royal Navy aircraft carriers being assembled in Rosyth - as opposed to Liverpool, Belfast or Newcastle.

    In terms of Iraq, for sure, the British government made a whopping big mistake. They'll make more too. So would Scotland if we were independent. Mistakes happen, just like Chamberlain with his 'peace in our time' garble. Besides an independent Scotland will push through proposals that Scots are agaist too - you're kinding yourself if you think that democratic accountability will suddenly increase in a independent scotland. The key is to learn from these mistakes and not to use cheap opportunism as a tool to advance a political agenda.

    In terms of nukes, for sure we dont really want them here. But like it or not, we have them for our benefit to protect the Scottish - and UK - people from foreign attack. They made the Soviets think twice about launching a pre-emptive strike and personnaly I'd sleep better at night knowing we have some kind of response to a future Iranaian nuke that is pointed straight at us. And if you think being independent would stop that remember that nuclear fallout doesnt respect national boundaries.

  • 208. Julie G - Alba

    Monday, June 2, 2008 13:35

    206. DaveyMac - Web

    But Mr Mac, aren't we already a nation? Does holding a British passport stop us from being Scottish?

    There is no democratic deficit. We already run our own country through the Scottish parliament. Surely control of defence and foreign affairs is best left to a larger enitity that can handle it better? I would feel more secure protected by the British Army rather than a Scottish Security Force. No disrespect intended but we do have the finest forces in the world...

    In terms of nationhood, we already have all the atributes of a soverign people. We have a parliament. We have accountability. At the UK level, the PM, Chancellor, Defense Sec and speaker of the House are all Scots...if we have a problem we can go to our MSPs, our MPs, our MEPs, our councellors...we have plenty of stages to protest too.

    There are also plenty of examples in international politics of nation states that are made up of soverign entities that willingly become part of a larger political being. In fact, the evolution of most states is from city states, to larger regions and ultimately to nation staehood. This is normal.

    For example, Bavaria is a 'nation' but is part of Germany, the Basque country is a 'nation' but part of Spain. Flander is a 'nation' but is part of Belgium. The 12 origninal US colonies were 'nations' but become the United States. Likewise Brittany, Andalucia, Quebec, Greenland...the list is endless!

    Many of these areas have their own seperatist movements but NONE have actually have actually seperated. I wonder if that tell us something...

  • 209. Colla - the highlands

    Monday, June 2, 2008 15:39

    We need to look afresh at all of our public bodies and determine which need to be national and which should be local.
    Services at local level should not need layers and layers of managerial oversight and bureaucracy. As long as they are locally accountable to locally elected politicians.
    The "accountable" local area should outside of Scotland's cities, be based around the catchment area of all secondary schools.
    Such "building blocks" may agree to come together for some local services. Such building blocks would be small enough to do away with "Community Councils" - replaced by these "beefed-up" Parich Councils - tasked with running all local services - each with a directly elected provost and 3, 4 or 5 councillors.
    Every possible service that can be managed locally, should be.
    Schools, Primary Health Care; Anti-social Behaviour type policing; Recreation; Housing; Social Care etc etc.
    All other functions - Transport; Serious Crime; Child Protection; Acute & Specialist Health Care; etc etc - should be managed at National Level.
    Trust communities, trust local people and their elected representatives.
    Parish Councils should also be aggregated to form the boundaries for MSP constituencies - with regular meetings convened by MSPs to meet with reps of their electorate.
    Slainte Mhor

  • 210. Thomas Porter - Scotland, Aberdeen

    Tuesday, June 3, 2008 16:53

    207. John Murphy - Paisley -

    "Or perhaps we could look at the UK signing the anti-cluster bombs treaty."

    Britain has actually opt out of several parts of the Treaty.

    "Or perhaps we could look to the example of Westminster redefining the boundries of the North Sea petrochemical zones so that now 90% of the UK zone now lies in Scottish waters."

    Westminister attempted to change the course by 2 degrees in an attempt to secure more oil for England.

    Your not very good at protecting the Union mate.

    "So would Scotland if we were independent."

    Make the same mistakes as Britain? The majority in the Scots Parilament are against many of the unpopular British Policies. I think that shows they are wiser then the British Government.

    And if an Iranian nuclear missle hit Britain the majority of us would be dead (depending on the type of nuke). Who will then shoot back at Iran?

    We should be focusing on missle defence.

    208. Julie G - Alba

    The European Union and NATO is our future. Scotland will better serve ourselves Independently within these Organisations.

    Unless you would like to follow Britain into Iraq once more?

    Or watch as more fishing rights are sold to EU by Britain?

    Shall I continue?

[Latest First] | [Earliest First] Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]

Page updated: Friday, August 8, 2008