The Scottish Government

An Independent Scotland

Friday, November 30, 2007

The White Paper says: For Scotland to achieve full independence, the UK Parliament must cease to have competence to legislate for Scotland and the UK Government must cease to have competence in respect of executive action in Scotland. Correspondingly, the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government would assume the full range of competence, duties and responsibilities accorded to sovereign states under international law.

This blog is now closed to further comment.

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] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69]

• 361. Patrick Kirkwood - Ayrshire

  Sunday, January 13, 2008 20:37

  Post 353 - congratulation you've managed to prove that the UK's population is 60 million and Scotland's is only 5!
  
  The UK may well have the strongest military in the EU etc ... but I dont want to invade anywhere! I just want decisions to be made in Scotland so they are appropriate to Scotland, and not designed solely for the benefit of London and the South-East corner of England as is currently the case.

• 362. G Goodall - Glenrothes

  Monday, January 14, 2008 12:28

  #360 and #359
  Sorry Robert but Independence IS about facts and figures. As a Taxpayer who is now reaping the dubious benefits of a pension, and who is hoping to do so for many years to come, we do need to be told how we are going to be able to live in this Utopia of an Independent Scotland. So far all we have had is a stream of broken promises which is just not good enough.
  
  'Feel good' factors do not put food on the table, roofs over our heads or heat the rooms we live in. HOW these are going to be acieved needs to be spelled out clearly and succinctly.
  
  Bonjour Monia, your opinion is welcome, albeit misguided. I believe the Treaty of Versailles broke the Auld Alliance of common citizenship between our two countries, but many of us still remember the alliance with fondness. However since the Union of the crowns and the Union of the Parliaments we have worked with the English, Welsh and NI to our mutual benefit. Indeed Scotland has played a role in the success of the UK far in excess of its size, a point tended to be forgotten by many of my coutrymen and women. e.g. the monetary (capitalist) system was promoted by a Scot, the Russians claim Communism was also promoted by a Scot, and if I continued I would soon run out of space.
  
  Thanks for your sentiments, but as ever, we Scots will be capable of making up our minds, as we have in the past.
  
  
  

• 363. Stan Grodynski - ast Lothian

  Monday, January 14, 2008 13:01

  [358] You have certainly expressed some good arguments for moving from the current constitutional arrangements to a federal structure for the Union, yet while suggesting I am “pessimistic” you do not apparently share my optimism that Scotland can actually stand on its own feet in the modern world, or at least within the EU?
  
  Also, when referring to “Scotland’s relative decline” you suggest that I be “realistic”. Perhaps I am a little naïve, but does the ‘counter-evidence’ of low unemployment figures necessarily translate to a better-off or even healthier society? The fact that both parents may now have to work in order to survive financially is perhaps not the most desirable outcome for those concerned about quality of life issues and about matters such as the lack of positive parent time spent with many of our children today.
  
  As most people familiar with statistics are fully aware, they often don’t tell the full story and sometimes even mask the truth. While the ‘economic juggling acts’ of Gordon Brown and his predecessors are to be admired, most people who have travelled extensively over the last two or three decades can point to countries whose ‘visible progress’ has been remarkable over that time. A country like Singapore for instance, while it may have been relatively ‘poor’ a few decades ago, now has caught up, and perhaps overtaken Scotland in a number of areas. Certainly the US is still an important economy, but the major changes that will challenge European economies in the future are more like to arise from decisions made in China or India, no matter how fervently some believe Britain’s elevated status in the world should continue indefinitely.
  
  Of course there is an economic strength in numbers, but why does Scotland need to pay the ‘membership fees’ of two economic clubs when one is much larger and growing much faster than the other? Maybe the argument is that we can ‘have our cake and eat it’ if we continue in both clubs, and that because the smaller club will be better run in a Federal UK, this will make the total cost worth paying? However, when one considers that a significant component of the ‘cost’ would still be a smothered voice in the EU decision-making process, then I return to a rationale expressed earlier in this conversation that if the UK were outside the EU that Scotland would be best served by remaining in the Union (admittedly with the Union redrafted along federal lines as you have suggested), but if the UK is to remain in the EU (the position advocated by most major political parties within the UK), then Scotland should represent itself and fight its own ‘battles’ if necessary.
  
  With all due respect, the remark that the ending of the Union would present a comparatively “highly uncertain future” for Scotland does not do justice to your fellow Scots or to your other well thought-out and cleverly presented arguments.

• 364. trevor swistchew - edinburgh

  Monday, January 14, 2008 21:32

  Roll on full Independence let there be no more doubts about what may or may not happen this aint no fairy tale this is born from people who have been stifled for three hundred years with little say in their destiny.where is it written that only the Union will serve the people best?can any writer here recall the blatant way that the Thatcher Government ignored Scotlands call over the totally rip off Poll Tax?that is but one mere example of Scotland requiring to reassert her Independence so that the people of this nation feel that they matter that they are heard in the hall of political power.if you ever wrote to politicians who either delay in replying or dont reply you will know why people must be heard by those elected into office thereby to SERVE the people it is not about what they want it is about how Scotland can realise a way to collectively go forward and create a more enlightened and equal society.if you see the injustices around you then you know why Scotland has to change.if you dont see the injustice around you take another look and see the disparity in people haves and have nots lovely houses and squalid dumps elderly people who die in their thousands every winter men and women sitting in doorways or selling the Big Issue then look at yourself ;are you happy with the way the politicians and big business puts profit before people?the cherished Unionists have wasted illions on nuclear weapons(which must never be fired at anyone)money which would mean a home a decent wage and financial freedom for every person in this nation.so let noone be hoaxed any longer;the Union has failed and time marches on and on and on. Scotland waken up.you are perfectly right in seeking freedom. that is what every nation on Earth aspires to.

• 365. Ian Innes - Elgin

  Tuesday, January 15, 2008 17:00

  I would like to rename this 'national conversation' to 'The peoples forum' and long may it continue.

• 366. Ron - Bonnybank

  Thursday, January 17, 2008 04:08

  Thanks for allowing me to comment on this important debate, i just want to say that i do not believe Scotland has benefited greatly as part of the union. Over the last 30yrs both Labour and Tory governments have failed Scotland, children still living in conditions of poverty on drug infested housing estates where crime spills out everywhere, and so many other important issues needing to be addressed. It is like i can almost see the future and it looks grim, i see independence as the only way to stop this gradual decline.

• 367. G Goodall - Glenrothes

  Thursday, January 17, 2008 14:26

  To digress for a moment can I address the opening statement for this blog?
  
  Quote "Correspondingly, the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government would assume the full range of competence, duties and responsibilities accorded to sovereign states under international law." Unquote
  
  Obviously a statement that means more on paper than in practice. We can take out "competence, duties and responsibilities " and that would be more in keeping with the actual situation.
  
  Before we pass the responsiblity of running this coutry's affairs perhaps we should expect to see that the Government has the 'competence' to undertake the 'Duties and responsibilities' expected of it, before even considering the leap into the unknown.
  
  In short, the current members of the government have shown themselves to be as self seeking, incompetent and devious as they have claimed their opponents to be.
  
  
  

• 368. Michael Brown - Stirling

  Friday, January 18, 2008 16:44

  I have recently returned from a ten year stay in Australia. Throughout my time in that country, I met numberous ex-pats who worked in different fields including business, engineering and education. Most of them want to come back but will not do so until Scotland becomes an independent nation. Can Scotland really afford to lose this talent and investment?

• 369. Mike KIng - Birmingham

  Friday, January 18, 2008 20:47

  Re: 360. Robert Arnold -
  Sunday, January 13, 2008 10:02
  
  Robert wrote "Independence is NOT about facts and figures though" and "I love my country ..."
  
  I couldn't agree more. Only one thing, my country is Great Britain and an independant Scotland in Europe will not be "free".
  
  Mike (a Tory a-hole and no doubt a Unionist a-hole too. Proud of both!)
  
  

• 370. David Jackson - Glasgow

  Friday, January 18, 2008 23:41

  Paul Johnson - I am no particuliar Unionist, but your comments are quite correct. I fear being a wee tadpole in a big pool. Of course it can be done and will work, but is it better?
  Also, what currency is this independent country going to use? The pound completely controlled by another sovereign country or the Euro where we have even less influence than we currently have.

[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] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69]