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]

• 411. Robbie the Pict - Isle of Skye

  Saturday, February 2, 2008 22:34

  Pardon the constitutional pedantry, but just how does 'international law' define a 'sovereign state'? Given that we are globally recognisable as 'a people', a unit of legal personality in law, then we should be enjoying self-determination already, and anyone denying that right from outside our ancient boundaries commits an imperialistic offence. Anyone denying our right to be self-determining from inside our borders, such as Ukanian Anglo-centrics, acts treasonously and against the interests and rights of the sovereign people. The SNP and many of its supporters do the people a disservice when insisting that self-determination means independence, much as nationists may advocate that as best in the end. At the moment the vision of independence is badly presented, perhaps because that political party is short of real political visionaries, and independence is a bit of a pig in a poke to a large number of potential sympathisers. It has to be remembered that the people of Scotland are like released prisoners at the moment and rubbing their eyes after 300 years in the dark of a Hanoverian bottle dungeon. Initially it must be explained that they have the right of self-determination. We must not spoil that moment of constitutional realisation by immediately selling them ill-thought out SNP snake oil. If we are to truly respect the right of the people we must respect that fact that they might want to cling to what they know for a while, just to get their collective breath. The next step is a referendum, but with the right to choose from a range of options, which includes the status quo and, for a change, complete independence, thus properly respecting the right of the people to decide their own destiny.
  The term 'state' is queried because so-called 'states', or even 'nations', have no rights as such, only 'peoples' have rights; so what are the precise terms of reference, before we waste time arguing for something we may already have. Does Westminster recognise the present-day Scots as a people? Or does Westminster deny that the Scots are a people? Believe they respect us properly when the Scottish Judges take oths of abjuration and re-align themselves in favour of service to the Scottish people.
  Lastly, as we extricate ourselves from under the heel of the Hanoverians and their disgraceful apologists let us remember the true Pretanni, the native Britons to whom the Scots, Picts and Anglish have all been so cruel, but mostly the last who usurp their name in disguised imperialism.
  Teach your children well.
  Robbie the Pict.
  

• 412. trevor swistchew - edinburgh

  Sunday, February 3, 2008 15:08

  once upon a time in a land far north of london a minority government put forward the notion that their nation could run its own affairs.it had been run from the south for centuries and the new government were convinced that need not be so.however many people in that land used to being given their instructions from the south thought it would not work.it didnt matter to them that their nation had educated people,high levels of literacy and natural resources,many dug their heels in and refused to look at what the minority government had said about how the previous governments had failed to prosper the people in the north.not only that but they refused to accept that working people had gotten a poor deal through the unity so loved by those who thought that nothing else would work.in 2008 scotland has to develop compassion in its politics seeing that the equality talked about by unionist politicians is at this time mere myth.people are not equal or if they are then some are more equal than others.many working people prosper by their own effort,that is to their credit,but there are in place systems which keep poverty alive,one of those is the pension system which is not linked to inflation.another is the failure of employers to pay workers enough to meet the cost of living.how MANY PEOPLE ARE FORCED TO GIVE UP THE EFFORT TO BUY A HOME OR EVEN RENT A HOME BECAUSE OF HUGE DEMAND.
  people.look around you .scotland can do better and must if it is to prove for sure that independence is the fairer way.
  i believe that independence is the future.
  i am not a member of the snp
  but i say ;less than a year is not enough to oppose their effort.
  let this nation flourish.

• 413. Labour Landslide? - Fife

  Sunday, February 3, 2008 16:31

  #407
  
  If we are no longer willing to support parties that don't support independence why did 60% plus vote for Labour last week in the by - election.
  
  Could it be because Fife has gone from the cheapest care provider in the country to the most expensive, under SNP / Lib - Dem admin? And the SNP councillor who stood on a mandate (local) to fight against a housing project in the ward, voted FOR it at the planning committee stage, so that it passed 31 for , 29 against. Not only that but then declared, after the meeting, he would continue the good fight! No word from the FM to intervene on behalf of the residents, like he did in Aberdeen, Aviemore and Lewis.
  
  Or could it have been that a 5 - figure contribution to SNP funds will guarentee an audience with the same personage? Money for favours?
  
  Looks like sleaze, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
  
  

• 414. Galen Milne - Dunblane

  Sunday, February 3, 2008 18:16

  I really consider the issue of so-called "independence" for a nation the size of Scotland an unnecessary distraction in terms of our actual aspirations for our citizens in this increasingly shrinking world. We know that large multinational companies more than governments these days can influence global events so the idea of making us an even smaller fish in this pond is nonsense. It might provide some self satisfaction for a number of our more narrow minded politicians and their supporters but in terms of improving our economy and the social fabric of our society I think its all smoke and mirrors in an effort to kid us on we are somehow going to be better off apart from the current UK structures. The SNP has no great vision of our nation apart from so-called "independence" and the recent lack of investment in University funding allied to cut backs in our research institutes at a time when we both in Scotland and the UK will have to rely much more in technological innovation just underlines this lack of vision. Devolved authority on delivering local services is fair enough but the rest of the package on offer just doesn't appeal I'm afraid. If we did go down this route then even more of our top brains would join the road south I predict leaving us no more than a playground for the rich to hunt, fish, and play golf now and again. A low wage service industry is what we will become if investment in real innovstion isn't forthcoming.

• 415. alexander phillip - dumbarton

  Monday, February 4, 2008 10:16

  The general public were denied the chance to decide their own fate in 1707,so now we have the chance to make up for that crime against democracy by holding a referendum albeit 301 years too late. The referendum gives Scotland a chance once and for all to decide her own fate whatever the outcome may be.

• 416. Stan Grodynski - East Lothian

  Monday, February 4, 2008 11:40

  [414] It is indeed a pity that the 'self-made man' from Fife who apparently has travelled extensively has not been able to shed the monkey from his back. However, even someone who appears reluctant to accept that all parties have something to contribute to a positive future for the citizens of Scotland, including the SNP (that he appears preoccupied with denigrating), has the potential to be constructive in this 'conversation' if he can stand back from a political legacy that has disappointed many of the most disadvantaged in our society and objectively assess how we might make a better future for all.

• 417. Angela Fitzgibbon - Suffolk

  Monday, February 4, 2008 13:13

  Independence will be good for Scotland, and is correct choice for Scotland's future. The London Government is holding Scotland back.

• 418. Hard of hearing? Not me - Fife

  Monday, February 4, 2008 14:36

  #417
  
  Jealousy will get you nowhere. I have been listening and I'm afraid there hasn't anything worth while to note. The main denigrator of parliamentary opposition is the incumbent First minister who choses to rant about how badly the previous administration did rather than come with a constructive answer to the question or join in a debate.
  
  If Wendy Alexander's 'crime was to accept a £950 donation in good faith, what does asking for a five figure donation to party(SNP) funds to get a meeting with an SNP minister constitute? It would appear the former is a legal position, the latter is a moral position. I personally think it is a morally bankrupt position, as will many other voters.
  
  Question, does the statement 'I was not aware that the project would be called in the very next day', mean 'I did not know the project would be called in'?
  
  Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with 'parliamentary speak' before making judgements.

• 419. Stan Grodynski - East Lothian

  Monday, February 4, 2008 18:07

  [419] Clearly the Labour party in Scotland will still appeal to some, who like the Labour party itself, have been deluded by the party's self-publicity over many years. Fortunately in recent times more and more people have seen through the hypocrisy that has increased the 'gap' between the rich and the poor in this country. The fact that some cannot see the difference between an admitted illegal act and an alleged improper use of government office that to date has not been supported by any evidence is disappointing and demonstrates that there is still work to be done before all of the electorate will consider the arguments for and against Independence objectively. However, as we slowly move to more balanced political reporting by the media in general in this country, the majority of fair-minded people in Scotland can begin to hope that even the most apparently close-minded citizens will choose an inspirational future that provides the greatest opportunities for all of our children rather than an underachieving past that in practice disadvantaged many in our society.

• 420. Francis F Clementine - Glasgow

  Monday, February 4, 2008 19:35

  Independence? Yes.
  
  
  Unionism? No.

[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]