Scotland: How a Nation was Conned

How Westminster lies conned a nation into voting NO in September 2014.

And why the fight for Scottish Independence will continue until it happens.

A wonderfully enthusing video for people wanting independence for Scotland  and a shaming one for those who don't.

#toysootthepram #biggestcrisissincetheabdication #projectfear2 and all that stuff. Its now the big day!

Well here we are again on the day of a UK General Election.

So much has changed, but so much stays the same.

One of the things that has marked out this campaign, is the coverage that Scotland has been getting. The BBC has been showing Reporting North Britain (known by the BBC as Reporting Scotland), and North Britain 2015 with Sarah Smith (known by the BBC as Scotland 2015) on the BBC Parliament channel so it has been available to everyone in the UK. No other BBC ‘local’ news programme or political programme is shown on this channel on a daily basis. Nicola Sturgeon has been getting coverage and the ability to state the SNPs case outside Scotland during UK wide news and leaders debates. 

Nobody can deny that the SNP’s position in the polls has not considerably raised Scotland’s profile.

What has stayed the same is the British Establishment’s reaction to the SNP. However now it looks as though the SNP and therefore Scotland might actually have the possibility of getting something out of a UK General Election, the barbs have been getting somewhat stronger although have not been to the standard we have come to expect after the Scottish Independence Referendum campaign in the months and years leading up to September 2014.

There were murmurs of #ProjectFear2 but when a twitter storm started from disgruntled Yes supporters this very quickly seemed to peter out , although it may be resurrected at the polling stations by Labour representatives mirroring what occurred at the polling stations at the Independence Referendum.

We then had the #biggestcrisissincetheabdication from Theresa May the UK Home Secretary. True she was referring to a constitutional crisis stating that English voters would question the legitimacy of a UK Government where the SNP held sway over taxation and spending powers that would not affect their own country. She was obviously forgetting the fact that Scotland too is part of the UK (quite a common problem for those in Westminster, even for many of those elected from Scottish constituencies once they are in the Westminster bubble), the SNP are a UK political party legitimately standing for election to the UK parliament to represent Scotland, and that Scotland had to put up the same thing in the opposite direction for just under 300 years up to the re-establishment of a Scottish Parliament in 1999. After all when Scotland had 72 seats to England’s 550 there was not a great deal Scotland could do about anything as it didn’t really matter how it voted. Scotland’s views only ever mattered when they coincided with what England wanted, and that remains largely the case since 1999 in matters reserved to Westminster.

This was quickly followed by #toysootthepram Milliband, who was so harassed by the ‘impartial’ UK media, indicated that he wouldn’t even talk to the SNP if they won lots of Westminster seats in the House of Commons inferring strongly that he would therefore prefer a Tory Government rather than a left wing coalition if this coalition required the SNP to function. This indicated a lack of political maturity on his part (hence the ‘toys oot the pram’ line), but also part of the arrogance and the sense of entitlement that has come to be associated with Labour in Scotland i.e. they don’t care how people voted as everyone is going to have what Labour wants.

According to the opinion polls Scotland could be on the cusp of something historic. I can’t say as I am surprised given the infamous vow which promised the maxiest devolution but ended up a mish mash which will be a nightmare to administer and gives Scotland complete control of road signs but very little else. Everything else seems to be qualified by the requirement for a Scottish decision to be approved by Westminster which largely defeats the point unless I am missing something.

The opinion polls have been showing the SNP polling amazing numbers since late 2014 and I remain in a state of disbelief over them. If the SNP win anything above 11 seats then the result will be historic (NB: When these 11 seats were achieved in November 1974 Scotland had 72 Westminster seats). If the party gets more than 30 as looks likely then Scotland is much less likely to be ignored in future as it gives the SNP real clout. If the SNP win over 50 seats out of the possible 59 Scottish seats then I may need to call an ambulance for the shock. I have wanted the SNP to get a majority of seats in Scotland since 1978, and I honestly thought I would never be alive to see the day. However if I end up in hospital I don’t think I shall get seen very quickly because of the queue of ousted Labour MPs in front of me. If anyone reading this knows me and wonders where I am on Friday when I am not contactable I shall send you my ward number in due course.

However Scotland’s position even if the unlikely event of the SNP gaining 59 out of the available 59 seats was to actually occur then it needs to be remembered that although an amazing political statement will have been made, because Scotland remains part of the UK this will still only be a small part of the 650 seats in the House of Commons in Westminster. This is the actuality of Scotland’s position in the UK, and nobody in Scotland should forget it. It is only the fact that both major UK parties are virtually neck and neck in the rest of the UK that Scotland can have clout on this occasion.  Onwards and upwards.

SCOTLAND WAS ROBBED OF ITS INDEPENDENCE

This is my response to any NO VOTER who tells me to just get over it and accept the result that Scotland VOTED NO in September 2014.

If the Scottish Referendum had been conducted FAIR and SQUARE then the result would have been considered to be more acceptable to the people who campaigned for and then voted "YES".

Unfortunately by any measure it wasn’t. David Cameron himself said, and I quote " The Scottish Referendum is a matter solely for the people of Scotland to decide".

From that moment on the people of Scotland and down south were bombarded with scaremongering lies and deceit from Westminster, Better Together and mainstream media which includes the newspapers, the broadcasters with particular reference to the BBC.

Westminster was virtually put on hold when it looked despite all this that Scotland may have the temerity to vote Yes with 100 Westminster Labour MPs shipped up to Scotland by train to try to force a NO vote.

Bus loads were brought from England and Wales (paid and fed I may add) to canvas for a NO vote whereas Yes campaigners were largely doing everything for free and were from Scotland.

Scottish Pensioners were phoned in their homes by Better Together and told that they could lose their pensions and put them at risk if they voted "YES". This was then backed up by Labour people at the gates of polling stations telling those on benefits or pensions that they would lose them if people voted YES.

Scottish SUPERMARKETS and BANKS and BUSINESSES were called into Downing Street to frighten the Scots about prices going up and businesses moving south and mortgages costing more if they "VOTED YES".

Scotland was told that the NHS would be at risk if they VOTED "YES". But we now know from Labour General Election campaigning that it is at risk in the Union. Gosh what a surprise! People were told that Scotland’s OIL would run out in 20 years; and 2 days after a NO VOTE they were told that the Oil would last at least 120 years. None of the economics of a Yes vote was based on oil being anything other than an added extra.

The USA was contacted to speak out for the Union; Russia was contacted to speak out for the Union; Spain was contacted to speak out for the Union; The EU was contacted to tell Scotland it would not be allowed in the EU. Even the British Embassies around the world were contacted to support the Union.

Every dirty trick in the book was used by Westminster against Scotland voting Yes. The only thing they did not do was put tanks on the streets and threaten to blow Scots off the map.

In spite of all the lies, the might of "THE ESTABLISHMENT" and dirty tricks etc being launched against them 45% of all the Scots VOTED "YES".

I think under the circumstances people in Scotland therefore have every right to vigorously pursue self determination and independence for their country. Justice will be seen to be done and honesty will prevail.

Any reservations I may have had before the vote have now gone thanks to what occurred during the campaign and on the day of voting. Until the day of Scotland’s independence, the fight goes on. Of that the world can be rest assured.

You're probably best putting the kettle on right about now before you read about the Scottish IndyRef

From the Facebook page of one of the Yes Provan volunteers. He is originally from England but now resides in Glasgow.

#YesBecause ...

So many positive futures are up for grabs that the thought of anything other than a Yes feels like it'd be the biggest missed opportunity for Scotland (and it's neighbours) that I can imagine happening, for as far into the future as I can comprehend.

I've seen absolutely no credible reason why Scotland couldn't be more successful as a normal country than it has been (and will be) whilst awkwardly contained within the failing state of convenience that is The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

This is not a breaking up or abandonment of Britain; it's setting a precedent for the rest of Britain by reconfiguring its democratic basis. And not before time.

Part 1

You're probably best putting the kettle on right about now.

Scotland as reforming constituent of the UK is a nice idea in theory, but I can't subscribe to the reality. I used to be very open to the federal arrangement, but I'm not convinced that it's workable. There seems to be scant appetite for genuine devolution of power to English regions. And there's no getting past the fact that England is over ten times the size of Scotland (in terms of population), so it'd be a lop-sided federation. The half-baked 2011 AV referendum was an example of how ambivalent Westminster is to even a modest level of self-led reform. In terms of managing foreign relations, the UK government's performance is not something to be cherished by my reckoning.

"More spent on them per head than other parts of the UK" is true (excepting London and Northern Ireland). But it's not telling the full story. Scotland has generated more tax per head than the rest of the UK for each and every one of the past 33 years. Yes, Scotland's 8.4% of UK population receives ~9.3% of UK spending. But it generates 9.4 per cent of annual UK tax revenues. http://is.gd/ahowix An independent Scotland could expect to start with healthier state finances than the rest of the UK. http://is.gd/kopoko

Oil? A finite resource? Unquestionably. It's been running out since the first barrel was extracted. But there's still a good few decades of it left by pretty much anyone's measure. Incomes dropped last year? Yep, as a one-off blip. Because of a particularly high level of investment, which tells its own story about the expectation of future returns. No-one is pretending that it'll bring "utopia". And moving away from it being a large part of the economy should be a priority. But name me a single country that wishes it didn't have its reserves of oil knocking about. Though even without oil and gas, the GDP figure in Scotland is still bigger than most UK regions. http://is.gd/riteze These reports go some way addressing the issues raised in the 'fiction' bit: http://is.gd/uyopaq & http://is.gd/ucajoh There's also the spectre of McCrone in the 70s. http://is.gd/qeyibi

Salmond? It's not a referendum on him. He can be voted out in 2016 if that's what's wanted.

The South East? Volatility gets mentioned in terms of oil. But few things are more volatile than the City of London and an economy resting on inflated house prices in the SE. Here's an ONS graph of how the UK has been handling the whole wealth distribution thing: http://is.gd/vejavi and the video it comes from: http://is.gd/amamec Better Together?

The EU? What's deemed to be good for the UK isn't necessarily good for Scotland. It's not inconceivable that the proposed referendum on UK EU membership in 2017 could see the UK withdraw, and take Scotland with it, against it's wishes. NB: Other countries with ~5m people have 13 or 14 MEPs. Scotland currently has 6 UK MEPs.

NATO? I don't particularly hanker after membership, personally, but 20 of NATO's 28 members neither possess nor host nuclear weapons, so Scotland without Trident wouldn't be an anomaly.

Are Finland or the Netherlands not independent because they share the Euro with other countries? Is Canada truly independent from the USA even though they have shared defence priorities? The last time I checked, the UK is building aircraft carriers but won't have any planes for them, so there's an agreement in place for French aircraft to use them. All countries are interdependent to some degree. No country operates in isolation. And that's a good thing. The point is that Scotland as an entity will take a formal role internationally, rather than having to go along with the often rather different priorities of the Westminster-led UK. There are a lot of ways to be an independent country: http://is.gd/yameje

I don't know what point it is that the Yes campaign are alleged to be making "against anyone English or living in England, no matter how much Scottish blood they have". I flat out reject the 'Scottish blood' angle being dragged into this debate. I don't know where to start with the 'remnant of English Empire' angle, so I won't go there. The monarchy isn't being questioned as part of this referendum, so that's an aside. And the (re-)asserting of ancient civilisations is way off track.

Part 2

Federal UK - Scotland is a country in a way that a region like Yorkshire or The Midlands, for example, aren't. And that's where I think the federal thing stumbles. Not that there's ever realistically been a sniff of it.

Foreign relations/multinational corporations - I don't consider the UK handling of them to be an example that Scotland needs to worry about living up to. I don't hanker after international 'influence' per se, either. I feel compelled to point out that, on a worldwide scale, Scotland isn't small. In a list of all countries by population: it's in the top half. Plenty big enough to hold its own. One UK positive: we're not too shoddy on international development aid. And long may that trend continue.

Oil - I think that any talk of a population share of oil is a red (black?!) herring. All credible sources I've seen based the share on geography and put it at ~90% to Scotland, not 'all'.

Debt - You can't renege on a debt you're not liable for, and the UK gov has already confirmed that it'll accept full liability for all of the debt. The proposal is that, in response for the creation of a currency union, Scotland will pay a per capita share of the debt.

 

Land ownership - It's one measure of wealth and there's definitely room (as it were) for improvement. But I don't see it as a feather in the cap of the Union or an achilles heel of Independence.

Euro - My understanding is that to join the Eurozone you have to be part of the ERM II for two years, and that participation in that is voluntary. Haven't forgotten about Greece and Spain. Or Ireland, who didn't request a re-entry to our Union when they hit trouble. And from what I've read, Iceland seem to be coming back strongly after actually jailing those responsible for their crash. Back in the UK, our banks needed a £640bn US gov backed bailout. Over fourteen times as much as the UK put into RBS. The UK doesn't have the broad-shouldered standalone independence that many would have us believe.

Plebs v rulers - This is along the lines of an angle I've heard from one of the more erudite of my No-supporting pals: a trad Labour type point about working class solidarity - the shared values of bus drivers and nurses in Perth, Pontypridd and Plymouth. Which I accept as a thing that exists. But what of the bus driver in Prague? Or the nurse in Peru? How is the political entity of the Westminster-led UK (in it's current incarnation) relevant to them? It isn't. Which begs the question of why the UK is being championed as the best vehicle for furthering the collective interests of us plebs and proles.

Undemocratic? - I can't buy into the claim on any level. I have been on a grassroots voter registration drive like no other. Every door has had a leaflet through it with simple instructions on how to register to vote. Turnout is expected to be unprecedentedly high. Scotland, as a country with its own established and acknowledged legal, healthcare, educational, and civic structures, &c, has a legitimate basis for asserting self-determination, as acknowledged by The Edinburgh Agreement.

 "If you don't know, vote No" is the line that's getting repeated by the Better Together campaign. I consider it to be one of the most shamelessly arrogant and insidious political messages I've ever heard. Boiled down, you're being urged to extinguish your inquisitive thoughts, to shut up, give up, and presume that this referendum somehow has a default answer. Which is in stark contrast to the message from the various stands of the Yes side, who are encouraging everyone to read up, discuss, and get involved in the debate. Educate yourselves. Engage. Query. Think. There are many voices and many sources to choose from and weigh up. And if you genuinely and honestly don't know after considering the cases presented to you, then exercise your democratic right not to vote at all. Or spoil your ballot paper if it takes your fancy. But don't let anyone try and convince you that there's some sort of default answer to all of this.

Also of interest is his friend Mark Shields' blog. He has posted several articles on the Scottish indyref and his coversion from NO to a YES voter, the links to which appear below...

Scottish Independence Part 1 - A Long Road to Change from 08.09.2014

Scottish Independence Part 2 - Why I am Voting Yes from 09.09.2014

Scottish Independence Part 3 - If it is a NO vote from 10.09.2014

Reproduced (with some minor alterations) with the kind permission of one of the YES Provan activists. All images have been added.

BBC News Channel and its 50 minute party political broadcast for the Labour Party on 08.09.2014, and mainstream media bias during the Scottish Indyref

I heard last night that the BBC news channel gave Scottish Labour an uninterrupted 50-minute party political broadcast for no obvious reason.

I understand it mainly took place at Loanhead Miners’ Welfare, and featured speeches from a warm-up man, then Johann Lamont, and finally the star attraction Gordon Brown.

I also heard that the actual event justifying this extraordinary coverage lasted just 2 minutes 36s.

If they’re offering us something new that directly relates to the Scottish Independence Referendum — they’re breaking the “purdah” electoral law.

If they aren’t, then it’s all a big fat lie. My personal view it is the latter.

Unfortunately I missed this extravaganza from this unbiased public service broadcaster (Aye right?), but seeing it was Gordon Brown who was speaking for the aforementioned 2m 36s I have to know; did he mention pensions? Or how about gold sales? No more return to boom and bust?

Obviously I am so unhappy that he never got re-elected to the office of PM – to which as I recall he was never actually elected in the first place.

How could a Miners welfare afford the fees for him to attend anyway?

Honestly another 10 days of this bilge presented as news and debate!!


They have really over stepped the mark this time, especially the BBC. The Electoral Commission will be down on them like a ton of bricks and force an apology and give free airtime to YES. Any minute now, just wait, will be along soon, yes sir, just you wait, its coming, any second now… anybody?

Can you imagine the storm if they gave David Cameron 50 minutes unquestioned and uninterrupted to make a pitch for the 2015 election?

We really need to complain to electoral commission and the BBC. That way we can have the best of both worlds.THE BBC COMPLAINTS LINE IS 03701100222

I thought this an excellent opportunity to include the video about John Robertson Professor of Media and Politics whose study on the BBC's independence referendum coverage has been silenced by the BBC and ignored by the mainstream media in general, Ofcom and the Electoral Commission.

Scotland's mainstream media really needs to take a long hard look at itself after the Independence Referendum. Is it there to serve the Scottish people; or is it there to serve the rich London and Westminster powerful elite and let the latter get away with anything they like?

The BBC is definitely not the only culprit, but it is by far the worst given that it meant to supposedly be unbiased. You can after all decide not to buy the Herald, the Scotsman (also now known as 'The North Briton' in many circles) and nearly all of the other print media (with the great exception of The Sunday Herald). You can also decide to ignore SkyNews. However you can't ignore the BBC, since it is everywhere and supposedly everybody in the UK and in Scotland has to pay for it through their BBC Licence Fee.

The NUJ of which I am a member must be wringing its hands, and crying in disgust at how the reputation of journalism has been further diminished by this. Gone are the days of Woodward and Burnstein (Watergate and President Nixon) and the heady days of ITVs World in Action, First Tuesday and the like.

The mainstream media bosses and owners seem determined to make journalism a joke, and the BBC seem determined to completely undermine the very good case for a public funded broadcaster. The whole thing reeks of corruption, nepotism, etc. and the sooner we can be shot of the lot of them the better.

Vote Yes for all this utter garbage to end, and for a radical re-alignment of the media to begin.



For the alternative side to all the mainstream media rubbish you may also like to refer to the following websites...
www.wingsoverscotland.com
www.newsnetscotland.com
www.bellacaledonia.org.uk

Get your YES Banners for Facebook and Twitter here! 14 available.

1. Jim Sillars: If we have a YES vote we are powerful. If we have a NO vote we are powerless.

2. Scotland has determined the outcome of a UK GE twice in 100 years. Good luck for 2015 if we vote NO.

3. The UK & Norway discovered oil in the 1970s. Norway has a colossal nest egg. The UK has a colossal debt.

4. If you're happy with falling living standards, stagnant wages and sky high corporate and shareholder profits then vote NO to Scottish independence.

5. Do you want the 50 million British voters to decide what happens to the 5.3 million people in Scotland, or do you want the 4 million Scottish voters to decide?

6. Analysis by the Financial Times puts an independent Scotland richer than the rest of the UK.

7. A vote for Scottish independence is a fundamental appeal to fairness.

8. Jim Sillars: Our greatest handicap is the myth of our own inadequacy.

9. Of course there are negatives to independence.

10. 6000 square miles of Scottish North Sea secretly claimed by Westminster in 1999.

11. There are 1425 members at Westminster. Scotland can elect 59. A fair and equitable union for whom?

12. Voting NO is like deciding to give 91% of the control of your car to someone else. Good luck with that, and don't depend on the airbag working.

13. If you are happy to let the UK squander your country's wealth (again), and leave its people poor (again) then vote NO to Scottish independence.

14. By all means vote no, but only because you want Scotland to be run by Westminster and the rest of the UK, and not by Scotland.