The Scottish Government

Scotland in the World

Friday, November 30, 2007

Aberdeen University has just set up a 'Scotland in the World' Forum to consider our country's global standing and global potential.

I was invited to deliver the inaugural lecture and I was delighted to explain how the Forum will be a major part of the wider National Conversation which is about the kind of country Scotland wishes to be - and the changes that must be made to meet our ambitions.

I talked about independence and interdependence and why this Government looks to Ireland and the Nordic countries - the Arc of Prosperity around us - as working models of what can be achieved in the modern global economy if Scotland had the same powers and freedoms that these countries take for granted.

I said that Scotland's interdependence is a fact. We have a strong economic relationship with the rest of the UK, our EU partners, and beyond.

And, I argued, it is precisely because we live in an interdependent world that independence matters.

The choice for Scotland is clear. We can choose to remain a bit player - unable to advance our interests other than through the UK. Alternatively, as an independent country, we can actively seek responsibility, eager to help shape the great global debates on the environment, on trade, on poverty, on the emergence of new economies.

For me, Scottish independence is not just an opportunity to move Scotland forward, but a chance for Scotland to give something back, to meet our global responsibilities. I want Scotland to be a leader in international conflict resolution, building on the tremendous sense of goodwill towards our nation across the globe.

Scotland is considering its position in a world of close and ever-growing economic interdependence. We benefit greatly from co-operation but that does not obviate the huge economic rewards for countries that are innovative and flexible and pursuing the right economic strategy, and a clear and distinct set of interests.

That is why this Government believes that now, more than ever, Scotland stands to benefit from full independence.

Read the full text of FM's lecture

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]

• 11. James Mitchell - Glasgow

  Thursday, February 7, 2008 12:21

  First Minister, congradulations you have done so well for Scotland in the time you have been in office. When ever this referendum comes i will sure be voting for an Independent Scotland.

• 12. William Swankie - Bathgate

  Thursday, February 7, 2008 17:19

  In the words of the "King"
  
  " A little less conversaition, a little more action please."
  
  Another thing, the E.U. will look after us. I do not understand why we hang on to a small country like England who does not even recognise us?

• 13. Anthony Rush - Renfrewshire

  Friday, February 8, 2008 15:22

  I fully agree that for whatever reasons they choose the people of Scotland have a right to seek Independence. I imagine that Alex Salmond would want the process of Separation to be carried out democraticly - despite the fact that the process of Union did not stand up to today's standards of democracy.
  
  I also assume that he wants Independence because he believes that Scotland will benefit from full Independence. Does he also feel that England, Wales and Northern Ireland should benefit? Because, for sure they will want to and will drive the hardest bargain they can.
  
  Some say that one day is a long time in politics, so 300 years certainly is. It is also a long time in history. But, it may be worth reflecting that the Act of Union came about because Scotland had failed as a Sovereign State whilst seeking global influence. Our tremendous achievements have taken place whilst we have been part of the Union and because the Union has been a benign arrangement. The London Government hasn’t imposed English Law, English Education, the English Church, a National Sporting identity etc. Despite the accusations that the English are arrogant they haven’t acted as a colonial power in Scotland. Scotland has enjoyed and prospered within a relationship which was built on mutual respect.
  
  Respect is an important ingredient in creating and maintaining a responsible society. I am certain that Alex wouldn’t want a new Scottish Independent Nation to be built on a feeling of emotional disdain and mutually apathy. This could blow hot by setting the wrong example for our youth.
  I think we should consider what Alex said in Aberdeen. Is there real justification to say that last May, the people of Scotland sent out a clear message and that they did not just vote for a change of government? I think not.
  Why at the close of the 19th century was Scotland the wealthiest country per capita in the world, if it was? Isn’t the reason rooted as the prosperity of the English industrial cities and heartland was? It was rooted in the British Empire.
  Yes the first half and middle of the twentieth century did see major economic and geopolitical instability. And, the industrial power houses are now the emerging nations, not Norway and Eire. At the same time as Scotland’s prosperity has slumped so has that of many others. Maybe, we have been lucky to have the Union as a prop.
  
  Creating a true Celtic Lion has an attractive ring of national fervour about it but was does it mean? Alex says that the truth is that we (Scotland) will only achieve our economic potential that way, “once we have the same powers and freedoms that these countries (Norway and Eire) take for granted”.
  
  I agree with Alex that we shouldn’t be convinced by Alastair Darling’s argument in a lecture at Stirling University in November. That only the Union could guarantee Scotland the stability, flexibility and investment that our economy needs.
  Alex sets out two choices for Scotland. He says we can choose to remain a bit part player - unable to advance our interests and influence the international agenda other than through the United Kingdom. Alternatively, as in independent country, we can actively seek responsibility - eager for the opportunity to help shape the great global debates.
  This is where I really feel confident that I can disagree. There is a third alternative. Stop labelling the great Scottish race as bit part players and extend their influence as committed players to creating prosperity within the Union.
  Alex said, “Global citizenship is about our commitment to safety and security around the globe. For me, therefore, Scottish independence is not just an opportunity to move Scotland forward but a chance for Scotland to give something back. To meet our global responsibilities”. Fine words but are they just words?
  He says that it is not just about national self-interest. Really?
  
  
  
  

• 14. Thomas Lyness - Bellshill.

  Saturday, February 9, 2008 14:46

  Although a long time member of the party I have just today registered and as I am still finding my round the sites this one will have to suffice to pass on some interesting news from the BBC website news 26 June 2000 I trawled up today.
  'Child poverty in Scotland is well on the way to being eliminated'says Communities Minister Wendy Alexander.
  'Labour promises to eradicate child poverty in twenty years is nothing more than a gross deception of the people of Scotland' says Alex Neil.
  Another point. Douglas Alexander this week complains the media treatment of his sister is 'outrageous'.
  No more outrageous than his deliberate misleading statement about Alex Salmond aired at Labour's 'Put the boot into Salmond' pre-election Oban conference. 'He claims to be an economist. Let's be honest. The biggest financial decision he has ever had to
  make was how much to bet on the three thirty at Kempton Park'.
  This of an MA in Economics and History and one time financial and oil adviser to the Royal Bank of Scotland.
  Honest?
  Neither of them knows the meaning of the word.
  

• 15. Howie - Virginia USA

  Saturday, February 9, 2008 19:41

  Under the 'one big happy family' present UK set up, its a fact Scotland has a lower standard of living than england(check their wages and house prices if you dont believe me).Strange huh?. You would think our oil revenues would at least put us on a level par in this unified 'equal' country. Mmmmmm Very strange.... they wouldnt be taking us for a ride would they?

• 16. You think we have gone away? - Fife

  Saturday, February 9, 2008 21:21

  To ALL
  
  For the record the Scottish press are no more biased towards Independence or Unionism than any other political persuasion, other than Conservatism, Socialism or Liberalism, the three main options for the electorate to consider. Nationalism does not propose to govern under any of these three philosophies relying on the premise that Scotland would be better under the guidance of Mr Salmond and his cronies if we will trust in their judgement. The way he sucks up to Ms Goldie and helps out the rich by freezing the Council Tax suggests he is a right winger. How much will we lose if Council Tax doesn’t rise by the inflation index, therefore no increase in allowances to the poorest who are subsidised by the exchequer?
  
  So far their judgement has failed to predict their ability to meet their pre-election promises, in fact they have failed to meet so many of their manifesto commitments that they might as well have ripped it up and started all over again. Oops they have, haven’t they?
  
  Let’s see,
  
  1,000 extra police on the streets? No(Sorry Ms Goldie we’ll reconsider.)
  £2,000 for first time buyers? No
  Scrap Edinburgh trams? No
  Scrap Sport Scotland? No
  Allow Local democracy to rule? No
  Abolish Community Tax? No
  Reduce Class sizes? No – Pass the buck to Local Authorities.
  Eliminate PFI? Maybe if we keep quiet it will go away.
  
  What other words of wisdom? Well what if we change the wording to read say it is our ‘ambition’ to meet these goals, will the electorate by it? So the government have the following AMBITIONS,
  
  Reduce class sizes to 18 for Primaries 1, 2 and 3. To meet this ambition we will write into the ‘CONCORDAT’ we have with the Local Authorities, and we can blame if it doesn’t transpire, and accept the kudos if it works!
  
  Reducing our carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, half the government will be dead by then, so we won’t have to answer for the failure to meet this pie in the sky promise. Meantime let’s put a block on the wind farm in the islands, and just ignore the nuclear option. Okay for the islands, as a majority of the population don’t want the wind farm, but 80% of the electorate would like a debate on how we are going to meet our power needs, including the nuclear option.
  
  FREE education for all, still our AMBITION, but we just don’t know HOW it will be funded. Fill in the rest yourself.
  
  As for Wendy Alexander asking the embarrassing question regarding the rape of the schoolgirl by the absconder from the open prison, surely if the First Minister is quick to point out the ‘failures’ of the previous administration then he can hardly claim innocence when HIS administration rescinded the ruling by Labour/Liberals to stop early release for violent offenders, and transfer of same to open prisons? He cannot have his cake and eat it.
  
  Measured against the machinations of the First Minister to interfere in the in the Trump affair, the saga of the returned £950 donation by Wendy Alexander being illegal pales to insignificance. Is it true that if you attended the SNP conference that a ‘donation’ of £10,000 got you an ‘audience’ with the First Minister? Or is that just Unionist propaganda? Not cash for honours, favours for donations?
  
  Ms Cunningham, Mr Neil and let’s not forget Mr Salmond should get the message that hectoring the opposition may score some points while it is fresh in the minds of the electorate, it is soon forgotten by them if the point scoring is all that can be offered. You will soon be on your own with the bad news now on your doorstep, with to opportunity to blame the ‘last lot’ disappearing into the distance.
  
  The so called fight against ‘losing’ the Scottish pound is just another attempt to hide the real issues that concern the Scottish people. Just for the record the Bank of England was founded by a Scotsman, whereas the BANK OF Scotland was founded by an Englishman! Divided loyalties there: big time. Also for the record, parliament, English or Scottish, can only legislate to make the respective currencies LEGAL tender; they cannot make the non acceptance of ANY currency by ANY citizen a crime. Or in plain terms a Scottish business person can refuse to accept English currency notes just as an English business person can refuse to accept Scottish currency notes. Hardly radical. The availability of cash machines and credit cards should make the whole exercise irrelevant. We should be concerning ourselves with why the care subsidies in many areas is going through the roof, e.g. from £200 / year to £8,000 + / year in Fife, 50% discount down to 10% for children using council facilities, swimming, gymnastics etc. You can’t get a quart out of a pint pot, but you can hide the deficiency if you deflect the attention from the reality by throwing sand in the eyes of the observers. The electorate should be provided with goggles as well as free prescriptions.
  
  
  

• 17. Gary Smith - LONDON

  Monday, February 11, 2008 18:06

  Living in London, but worked in Scotland for over 6 years in the past and our son born in Scotland, I recognise the fervour that Scotland should become independent. If I had a vote, I would vote for it, if anything to get rid of Brown, Darling , Browne etc... who are doing such a bad job here so that they go back to their roots and learn better! Would Scots vote for independence when the chips are down? I am not sure.
  
  I would like to draw attention to an area-skills shortates which I can see that this Scottish government is trying to address. In the background is the English model of colleges, 'new' universities(post 1992 creation) and the 'old' reputed universities. With the 'new' universities like Napier and RGU increasigly trying to compete with the 'old' universities like Edinburgh and Aberdeen ( teaching and research )there is not much room for the development of a range of skills. Why not get rid of this English model by merging the new and old universities so that a space is created to provide opportunity for the kind of training-centred skills which are sin short supply.

• 18. george alexander - north lanarkshire

  Monday, February 11, 2008 18:35

  I read the comment fom post number 16 and decided that all undecided posters should be referred to it as an example of the mindset of the Unionist.
  
  I suspect that most visitors to the site will ignore most of the post, but they shouldn't. This is all too typical of the kind of argument that Unionists in Scotland are putting forward.
  
  After reading the post just ask yourself this:
  
  What is it that this poster is advocating?
  
  A return to Scottish Labour and Liberal rule at Holyrood?
  
  Is he arguing that the Union is beneficial to Scotland?
  
  Is he saying that Scotland could not flourish as an independent country?
  
  Or is he simply having a bad tempered and bitter rant at the new SNP government?
  
  I will leave readers of the post to decide for themselves which it is.

• 19. Chris - Edinburgh

  Tuesday, February 12, 2008 10:29

  One thing that no one seems to be considering is what will the SNP version of "independence" mean? Their aim is to take Scotland into the euro, which means that all of the important economic decisions (eg interest rates) will be made not in Edinburgh but in Brussels! As a country of 5 million people, we will have even less say in our future than we do now!
  
  But it's ok, beacuse we'll get more money from the EU......or will we? Ireland got a lot of money from the EU to fuel its boom because at the time the EU was much smaller. Now, the EU has Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Slovakia in it, all of whom will be clamouring after EU grants. Scotland will get diddly squat. As for the oil, Scotland gets a bigger subsidy from London to the tune of £11bn than the £8bn that the oil is worth. The truth is that as an independent country, we would have to put up taxes massively just to maintain the public services that we now enjoy. The statistics speak for themselves: Glasgow our biggest city has the largest number of people on incapacity benefit than anywhere else in Britain, who is going to pay their benefits when we become independent?
  
  We can hardly claim that we are discriminated against. Our Prime Minister and Chancellor are Scotsmen as well as the coach of the most successul English football club in history (Man United.)
  
  Yes, England is a bigger country and sometimes domestic decisions in England are made that are not the best for Scotland. That is why we have our own Parliament. Never again can someone like Thatcher ignore our interests, as we now make our own decisions. The truth is that independence would be a total disaster. Lets not make this mistake, just for the sake of a narrow minded anti English bigotry.

• 20. Chris - Edinburgh

  Tuesday, February 12, 2008 10:31

  One thing that no one seems to be considering is what will the SNP version of "independence" mean? Their aim is to take Scotland into the euro, which means that all of the important economic decisions (eg interest rates) will be made not in Edinburgh but in Brussels! As a country of 5 million people, we will have even less say in our future than we do now!
  
  But it's ok, beacuse we'll get more money from the EU......or will we? Ireland got a lot of money from the EU to fuel its boom because at the time the EU was much smaller. Now, the EU has Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Slovakia in it, all of whom will be clamouring after EU grants. Scotland will get diddly squat. As for the oil, Scotland gets a bigger subsidy from London to the tune of £11bn than the £8bn that the oil is worth. The truth is that as an independent country, we would have to put up taxes massively just to maintain the public services that we now enjoy. The statistics speak for themselves: Glasgow our biggest city has the largest number of people on incapacity benefit than anywhere else in Britain, who is going to pay their benefits when we become independent?
  
  We can hardly claim that we are discriminated against. Our Prime Minister and Chancellor are Scotsmen as well as the coach of the most successul English football club in history (Man United.)
  
  Yes, England is a bigger country and sometimes domestic decisions in England are made that are not the best for Scotland. That is why we have our own Parliament. Never again can someone like Thatcher ignore our interests, as we now make our own decisions. The truth is that independence would be a total disaster. Lets not make this mistake, just for the sake of a narrow minded anti English bigotry.

[Latest First] | [Earliest First] Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]