Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 23rd November 2009 Change Date

Ian Swanson: Will Scottish voters think independently?

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 15 October 2009
SIX months from now, the SNP – along with politicians across the UK – will be embroiled in a general election campaign. Just a year after that, the rosettes and posters will be out again for the next Scottish Parliament elections.
If the SNP has its way, there will also be the small matter of a referendum on Scottish independence in between.

So, as the Nationalists gather in Inverness today at the start of their annual conference, they know they face some testing times.

However, First Minister Alex Salmond and his party are in confident mood. Two and a half years into government, when any administration might normally expect a drop in popularity, the SNP remains ahead in the polls. A recent survey of 19 marginal Westminster seats in Scotland gave the SNP a five-point lead over Labour.

Mr Salmond's declared strategy since taking office has been to make a success of governing Scotland under devolution and hope that will help persuade voters to take the extra step to independence.

He appears to be succeeding in the first part of that plan, but there is little sign yet of it paying off in popular support for an independent Scotland.

Mr Salmond has set the target of building on the 2007 Holyrood election victory by getting 20 SNP MPs elected to Westminster – there are seven at the moment. It's a tall order given the first-past-the-post voting system and the relatively few seats where the party is a close second. But pundits are unwilling to write off its chances and the SNP says latest polls suggest it could win as many as 25 seats.

Mr Salmond predicts the Tories will fail to win an overall majority and the SNP, together with the Lib Dems and Plaid Cymru, will hold the balance of power. He has previously spoken of a minority government having to "dance to a Scottish jig" and in a change of metaphor he now looks forward to Westminster being "hung by a Scottish rope".

Given that the Lib Dems will far outnumber the SNP, Mr Salmond's dreams of influencing a minority Conservative administration may be short-lived. But his speculation has allowed Labour to claim a vote for the SNP is a vote for the Tories.

The outcome of the general election will determine the context for the Scottish Parliament elections in 2011 but as things stand the Nationalists would be favourites to retain power at Holyrood.

A combination of a weak opposition, an SNP record of populist policies and Mr Salmond's own personality make it difficult to see the SNP being kicked out.

However, the most immediate electoral test, the Glasgow North East by-election, caused by the resignation of Commons Speaker Michael Martin, does not look so promising for the SNP. It's a traditional Labour seat and despite the dramatic Nationalist success nearby in last year's Glasgow East by-election, the odds are on Labour to win this time.

The result could give Gordon Brown a boost, but it is unlikely to do much to dent the SNP, which will talk down its chances in the run-up to the by-election and explain away defeat as all but inevitable in such deep Labour territory.

Back at Holyrood, the likelihood is the SNP will also fail to pass its Referendum Bill paving the way for a vote on independence. Although Labour and the Liberal Democrats have both been wavering on the issue, the chances are they will block the referendum. That could play right into the SNP's hands. Earlier this week Mr Salmond warned if the Bill is defeated, he will make a referendum the key issue for the 2011 elections.

The First Minister and his colleagues do all they can to make the idea of independence as normal and non-threatening as possible. Indeed, they like to give the impression we're halfway there already. The Scottish Executive has become the Scottish Government. They make a good case for why Scotland should have its own representative at the Copenhagen climate change summit and the Year of Homecoming has underlined Scotland's international reputation. Even the controversial decision on the release of the Lockerbie bomber served to highlight Scotland's place in the world.

Mr Salmond hopes Scots will take heart from all this and back the SNP's vision of an independent Scotland.

But it is easy for the independence message to be blown off course. The First Minister cannot have been happy at the weekend media coverage of comments by the SNP's Westminster leader and defence spokesman, Angus Robertson, that English armed forces would be allowed to keep their bases in an independent Scotland.

His claim that Scotland could banish UK nuclear weapons but still share bases, procurement and training was widely ridiculed as "a complete fantasy" and an admission that Scotland could not afford to lose the jobs and investment which UK military bases bring.

Equally unwelcome for Mr Salmond will have been remarks by former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, who said devolution was working well for Scotland but warned breaking away from the UK was "easier said than done" in light of the "hard economic realities" of independence.

Over the next four days, delegates in Inverness will congratulate themselves on proving the SNP is a credible party of government. But they still have a long way to go to realise their ultimate aim of a go-it-alone Scotland.





Page 1 of 1

 
1

,

15/10/2009 10:06:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

mark mccann,

15/10/2009 10:53:55
This is about as close as you'll get to an un-biased article in the Scotsman. They even mentioned a pro SNP opinion poll!!

"But pundits are unwilling to write off its chances and the SNP says latest polls suggest it could win as many as 25 seats."

Where is this poll? Why hasn't the Scotsman published it?
3

mark mccann,

15/10/2009 11:17:34
Found it, eventually. Holyrood Magazine.

"Indeed an Ipsos MORI poll published last month in Holyrood magazine put the SNP ahead of Labour not just in Holyrood, which showed a 13 point lead, but also six points ahead for Westminster, with 33 per cent of those asked which way they were ‘certain to vote’ in the general election saying SNP and 25 per cent answering Labour. The results were called ‘extraordinary’ by leading political scientist, Professor James Mitchell, who said that the electorate may already perceive Labour as the losers and are looking for a party that will defend the interests of Scotland against the Tories and that would quite naturally fall to the SNP."

http://www.holyrood.com/index.php?option=com_holyrood&func=article&artid=2918&edition=220&brick=3
4

Soosider,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 11:19:43
Thank you Mr Swanson, for reminding us what a balanced article looks like, also good that it was not published overnight for the usual trolls to climb all over.
I do believe they are slowly but steadily building the case for independence and steadily people are realising this is the way to go.
5

mark mccann,

15/10/2009 11:29:46
Like this one better, funny how it was never published;

Westminster Voting Intention
Survey End Date CON (%) LAb (%)
11 27

LD (%) SNP (%) Grn (%) SSP (%)
11 43 n/a n/a

Scottish Opinion/Mail on Sunday 20/05/09
6

mark mccann,

15/10/2009 11:40:59
Here's the full article with poll results. Compare this as a balanced, un-biased read..
http://www.holyrood.com/component/content/article/11-news-main/2770-new-poll-gives-snp-strong-lead-in-uk-election

Although I do agree with Soosider that the Scotsman, or at least Jim Swanson, seems to be blinking and rubbing his eyes, as he stumbles out into the daylight from the pit that most of his colleagues squat muttering in.
7

lulach mac gille coemgain,

15/10/2009 11:43:13
Scotlands Independence is now an inevitability in the re-structuring of world politics and the reality is that there is now no longer a need to govern Scotland from London.

And as a side observation - London is torn between Governance from Washington or Brussels.
8

crivensjings,

15/10/2009 12:20:11
This is a surprisingly unbiased article. Perhaps the Scotsman is starting to realise the strength of support for the SNP and that if it wants to survive it will need to adjust its political stance accordingly by backing the winners instead of the Labour losers.
9

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 15/10/2009 12:32:15
If anybody wants to see how people behave in an independent country we suggest a visit to Iceland.
Here 340,000 people live in an independent country with good health care, pensions and roads. Their police force is tiny and there is very little crime, so it is safe for people to wander around the streets by day or night.
(As a reminder of what can be done when you are in charge of your own assets, last week we paid about 95p a litre for petrol there, in a country with no oil !)
10

Edward,

15/10/2009 12:54:37
#9 Auld Twa
Another good example is Norway
Visited freinds there a few months ago.My first time there. Was completely taken by the place.Many similarities to Scotland as regards mountains and some sceenery, people the same as well. But the quality of life was fantastic (which recently was stated in an UN survey) Yes I found some things expensive, but then again they get paid more than us. The government there save just about everything , which is why they have the oil fund and why they were hardly affected by the credit crunch. In fact when I was there they were talking of recruiting everyone that had just been made redundant. The ressesion means not much to them
And they get on well with there neighbours!
11

Jimmy Fae the West,

In The Land of Green Ginger. 15/10/2009 13:08:27
300 years of watching the Scottish population leave as economic migrants to hopeless and bankrupt nations has be ended. Thousands of Scots pouring south in the aimless vain search for prosperity in English cities such as here in Hull! The BBC, channel Four and Channel Five have all been here in recent months to document the terrible poverty, the mass and the threatened future unemployment, the deprivation and the growing unrest which is directed at the London Government and manifesting itself as National Front. English/Yorkshire Defence League form of Fascism.

#1's post either in jest or in ignorance examples the hate that the many British National Party servants in Scotland hold for their own nation. Perhaps a remnant of being brutally forced to swear allegiance to Elizabeth and all her hangers-on, the English Government and it's militia leaders. Pretending that Scotland's many problems are caused by people in Scotland will soon be a thing of the past as it will become true.

A period of lean will be needed as Scotland replaces it's starved infrastructures with a couple of million Community houses. Real six lane, motor-ways allowing freedom of movement for goods and people between Scotland's cities north and south. A Scottish rail system interlocking with a mass of ferry systems to permit habitation of it's beautiful and graceful islands, a lifestyle only dreamed of down here!

The 30th of November should then rightly be a National holiday! It is not a matter of thinking independently it is about doing what is right.
12

Gregor Addison,

Münster, Germany 15/10/2009 13:27:19
A lot will depend on how things stand the closer we get to the election. I think the SNP will do well at the Westminster election. The choice is between a strong SNP at Westminster, or a weak Labour party in opposition.

Instead of sending more Labour backsides to polish the opposition benches, we have a chance to send a clear indication to David Cameron (who looks likely to get a majority based almost entirely on English votes) that the Tory's mandate stops at the border.

Labour will be in a difficult position if they lose the election. In the 80s and 90s, they used the constitutional question to focus anti-Tory support, through the Constitutional Convention (which led to the establishing of the Scottish Parliament). However, now they have thrown in their lot with Calman and the Tories, so it's hard to see how the Labour Party can any longer serve as a focus for anti-Tory feeling. A vote for the SNP under these circumstances seems the most sensible vote.
13

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 13:38:38
Trust Jimmy Fae the Loonybin to aver that anyone who is a Unionist must, therefore, be anti-Scottish. It's much like claiming "all men are rapists" - there must be some that are, but not many benny! Or claiming that all nats are anti-English or that all nats are pro-fascist and xenophobic by definition. Again, I'm sure there are some on the loony fringes that are all of these things and that they probably meet with Jimmy on a regular basis to discuss these issues in detail. But not many for, I suspect, Jimmy has few friends even on these boards.

As for his point about Nov 30th being a public holiday, could I remind Jimmy that this was promised in the SNP manifesto for 2007 - page 57 if he cares to look - but this promises has turned to dust. No change there then.

14

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 13:40:22
So do what is right Jimmy - and get your own party to keep some of those promises they made to the people of Scotland!
15

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 13:42:23
Oh, and in advance of your usual abusive reply -
1. Yes I am Scottish
2. Yes I do live in Glasgow
3. Yes I am a Unionist of the first degree
4. Long live the Union!
5. 110 to 67
16

Mikey,

15/10/2009 13:46:25
#13, how can you be a Scot and want to be ruled from England? Surely the two are mutually exclusive?
17

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 13:53:26
Mikey, have you ever heard of the Act of Union?
See ref 5.
18

Tom R,

15/10/2009 14:08:10
The article said "Equally unwelcome for Mr Salmond will have been remarks by former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, who said devolution was working well for Scotland but warned breaking away from the UK was "easier said than done" in light of the "hard economic realities" of independence."

I suppose Bertie went on to say that the Irish Republic
would be applying for re-admission to the UK-NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
19

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 14:16:11
Tom, you could also ask why Northern Ireland has chosen to remain part of the Union. Is it likely that NI will apply to become part of the Republic? Are the good folk of NI persuaded by your arguments about the benefits of independence outwith the Union. In your own word "NOT!!!!!"
20

Edward,

15/10/2009 14:35:55
#19 Peter1958
Peter I think when Scotland does become Independent and the union between England and Scotland is dissolved and consigned to history. The good people of Northern Ireland will have to decide whether (a)to put there lot in with the Republic of Ireland, (b) Go it alone and become independent on their own, (c) Put their lot in with England or (d) Try and link up withan Independent Scotland.
You see, after Scotland becomes independent , there will not be the entity called United Kingdom as there will not be multible Kingdoms to be united (something that Unionists havent quite fathomed out yet)
So what do you think Northern Ireland will do after Scotland becomes Independent and there is no UK to be part of? As they like the Monarchy, I reckon they will want to link with the Kingdom of England or the Kingdom of Scotland. What do you think?
21

TheDisplacedGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 15/10/2009 14:38:56
#19.You are conveniently forgetting the natural resources, the number and quality of businesses HQ'd here and the potential for green energy exportation Scotland has.
NI's attitude towards the union is completely different - their economy and future prosperity is not the main focus of the argument and as a fully independent state, I'd guess that NI would crumble. A re-unification with Ireland, at this point in time, is probably on par with staying with the UK (given the forthcoming spending restrictions and mounting national debt.
The long term future of Northern Ireland will be only be determined (and accepted by the vast majority) when the argument becomes wholly economic. I suspect this will happen when the UK (and England in particular) cut them loose after the inevitable forthcoming major constitutional change.
22

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 14:52:08
Displacedglaswegian, I have to take issue with you on every point.

There is nothing either inevitable or forthcoming about any major constitutional change that I can see on the horizon within the near or not so near future.

The Union will be pretty safe in the hands of Alex Salmond - almost (inevitably) certainly the SNP will squeeze in a question based around a "Dev Max" proposition and that will triumphantly be returned as the option duly elected!

The Nationalist Conversation will then have to be based around exactly what degree of feralism suits Scotland and does that include access to the BBC and Eastenders.

You see, I think it inevitable that the forthcoming referendum (when it eventually gets here) will see Alex Salmond and the SNP sell out its own membership.

"Trough". "Gravy", "Snout", "Train" - make up your own response!
23

Jimmy Fae the West,

In The Land of Green Ginger. 15/10/2009 14:54:10
#15peter1958, Glasgow wrote;
Oh, and in advance of your usual abusive reply -
1. Yes I am Scottish
2. Yes I do live in Glasgow
3. Yes I am a Unionist of the first degree
4. Long live the Union!
5. 110 to 67
________________________

There can be no posts as abusive as your confused post at unlucky Thirteen!

It is refreshing that you have no objections to November 30 being a national celebration when independence is returned but independence referendum was also a promise the SNP intend to keep!

As A British national Front supporter you will be aware of broken promises when the London government promised to be sleaze-free, whiter-than-white, no tax increases turned into twenty two stealth taxes on the poor,
dealing properly with young offenders, looking for WMDs, catching Osama BinLaden, Education, education, education! which meant the Scottish people paying for the next fifty years for Glasgow schools which won't last fifty years.

Scotland's parliament once had a vote on creating a union and they turned it down as a stupid idea. Of the original 25 articles of the undemocratic and anti-Scottish treaty, 9 have been removed (like Scotland's inherent right to have a mint allowing the Bank of England superiority) and 5 more articles have been seriously altered.

Vote SNP for less Schizophrenia, less broken promises and less loony fringes such as Peter's English Defence league factions.
24

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 15:07:03
Keep taking the medication Jimmy!
One day, it will dawn on you that England never did steal Scotland. That Scots were amongst the chief architects of Union long before 1707 and that even your beloved Jacobites were all in favour of the Union provided a Stuart was at its head.

Even the great Haddington philosopher John Mair raised the issue long before the English did.

There again, one day you might wake up and recall you are living in the 21st century - but somehow I doubt it
25

Curley Bill,

15/10/2009 15:36:10
Peter's right, Jimmy - it was Scots who sold our country for a pittance.
However - and correct me if I'm wrong - Peter is also a numpty.
26

JoeMiddleton,

Edinburgh 15/10/2009 15:44:20
It sounds like Peter that you need those pills yourself! Picking the unionists in Northern Ireland as a typical example of an independence seeking country is mad enough but that Scots were the main architects of the union is simply historically wrong.

If we were so desperate for union why were there riots in the streets against it, numerous public petitions against (and none in favour) and why did England have a large army on the border just in case the Scots didn't reach the 'right' decision?

Bonnie Prince Charlie declared that the Union of Parliaments was dissolved so I think we can see where his feelings lay.

Independence is normality for most countries around the world. Scotland is not uniquely incapable of independence and the union has been unfair to Scots since its inception.

How can it be otherwise when Scotland has only 8% of the population of a combined Britain?

I suspect you wouldn't like Britain to be in an 'equal union' with Russia, China or the USA yet you are happy for Scots to enjoy a similar unequal relationship with the rest of the British state. Why?

That's not good enough for most Scots in the 21st Century when we could have our own seat in the United Nations and an equal voice with other countries in the Europan Union.
27

Jimmy Fae the West,

In The Land of Green Ginger. 15/10/2009 16:32:27
#26Curley Bill, 15/10/2009 15:36:10
Peter's right, Jimmy - it was Scots who sold our country for a pittance.
However - and correct me if I'm wrong - Peter is also a numpty
____________________________

It was Scots who refused to close the Scottish parliament when they were ordered by their Lords! It was Scots who were rioting in the streets at the prospect of being annexed to England. It has been Scots who have been actively motivated to remove the shackles of the Union.

Just because there were Scots like Petered-out in the Crown's armies brutally quelling the Scottish Anti-British rioters in Scotland does not make Scotland or other Scots in any way responsible!
28

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 16:35:44
Joe writes: -
"Bonnie Prince Charlie declared that the Union of Parliaments was dissolved so I think we can see where his feelings lay."

Joe, as an usurper and upholder of the divine right of kings The Young Pretender simply never recognised any parliament - English, Scottish or otherwise. Please don't be hasty in holding out that he was a Scottish King first and foremost because the aim of the Stuarts was to restore themselves to the head of the Union of the Crowns and in that regard they neither cared nor fostered any relationships with any parliamentary force. In short, they sought restoration not reformation.

The words of James IV shouuld suffice to convince you otherwise that I lack support for my view that many Scots supported Union long before the Act: -

"Hath He not made us all in one island,compassed with one sea and of itself by nature indivisible?"

Speach to English Parliament 1604 - they voted against it of course - hardly the response of a country ready to devour its neighbour. I would have thought the opposite would have been true had the motivation you ascribe to the English been present.

Just one example.
Queen Anne of course would be another.

As for your point about countries "naturally" seeking independence, would Virginia suffice as an example of a smaller country seeking union with a larger one or would you need Texas to suffice.

Finally, a word about riots. The riot was, of course, the only method whereby the general populace, being disenfranchised, could make its feelings known on any issue. Pamphlets were produced too.

There was also a lot of general discontent in England too at this turn of events.

I'm quite sure that there were indeed sections of both populations who were dead against and volent with it. But we see no continuing action throughout the decades that follow do we.

The Chartists enjoyed a fine riot too but 1848 did not bring about revolution in Britain.



29

peter1958,

Glasgow 15/10/2009 16:38:52
Finally Joe, I am quite happy to see the UK in perfect Union with others. The EU is a very fine example of exactly that where the UK has ceded sovreignty to another, greater Union.

Not just a Unionist, but a pan-Unionist!
30

Mikey,

15/10/2009 16:59:31
Peter, I presume then, that you will have no problem with rule from Paris and Berlin?

Personally, I think that the Act of Union is an anachronism in this day and age and to defend it is just sheer folly. It's like saying that we must protect some person as head of state, just because they were born to it!

This is 2009, not 1799 and as soon as you unionists realise that, the better off Scotland will be.

Just as a matter of interest, what will you do when Scotland DOES become independent, as it most surely will.

Will you stay and help make the country great again, will you run for some unionists stronghold like Norn Irn, or will you become an enemy of the new state?
31

Alan B,

15/10/2009 17:11:46
#30

re EU.

Surely the EU has superceded the need for the UK union.

It gives a single market, economic help to the poorer regions, freedom of movement of people, and a common currency for those that opt to use it. It is also going to develop a more pro active foreign policy to ensure it economic power can be translated into its political power.

The UK offers Scotland next to nothing, other than those scared of change, or who have allegiences to britain rather than scotland for whatever reason.

32

Eve,

Scotland 15/10/2009 17:57:05
#13 peter1958: Odd comparsion.

NOT all men talk/think about abusing women or other men in a sexaul nature, so it is true that not all men are rapist or have the potenical to become one.

All unionist say/think that the union is very, very important & it really does come across as if it's more important than the people of Scotland themself etc.

So this is procived as not being pro-Scottish (As being pro-Scottish would invole putting the people of Scotland first before any union etc.) which can be easily be precived as anti-Scottish, inperticular when certain negative staments are being made frequently used.

If youse could show more hope, passion and postivitey about Scotland then this asumption would be made by a few.

Please note, I'm just reasoning why people might jump to lable in that way.
33

Jimmy Fae the West,

In The Land of Green Ginger. 15/10/2009 19:22:02
Other than a romanic nation that Scotland needs to suckle from the Great British union, we have not had one single reason for being in the Union. I have heard stories about benefits from working together, from being able to trust each other as equals and as partners. these are not reasons for such a union based in the bloated south east corner. They have this week also chanted the mantra that together we are stronger. That is palpable nonsense as nothing in the union made Scots safe from the Englishman who drove his Car-bomb into Glasgow Airport. Cuts in national security which are outwith Scotland's control and actionable asinine atrocities disguised as wars on terror, place Scots in far far greater danger.

Vote SNP for security!
34

mildmax,

Edinburgh 15/10/2009 20:20:46
Come on Salmond cannae wait for the vote, independance at last and especially freedom from snivelling english whingers in The Daily Mail. personaly think Alec should be using that rag as his election pamphlet and cut some costs.
35

peter1958,

Glasgow 16/10/2009 00:33:29
Alan B, if I were to follow your line of logic then Scottish independence would be predicated upon remaining wholly outside of the EU. The tone of your post suggests this is not the case. It would seem then that you are unhappy Scotland is part of the Union but perfectly happy to cede sovreignty to the EU.
As for your daft point about the Union offering Scotland "next to nothing" I beg to differ. Think Barnett Formula and follow the dots.

Mikey, your comments about "rule from Paris or Berlin" simply betrays your own nationalist xenophobia. When you join a Union - UK or European - the component parts act equally in partnership.

As for your final comments about being "an enemy of the new state" this is sufficient evidence that you are not fit to even consider yourself Scots.

Eve, none of the Unionists who post on these threads or any other that I know of have anything other than the welfare and success of Scotland at heart. We believe that is best achieved within the Union. Think on Eve - exactly what sort of Scotland will parties like the SNP build? A socialist one? A conservative one? A Scotland where the sick, unemployed and disabled are supported or one where they are left to fend for themselves? Alex Salmond's vision for Scotland is not based on Norway but Ireland and Iceland - low corporate taxation, low rent jobs.

Jimmy, there is no hope for you mate! Even the actions of an Islamic fanatic is grist to your mill. When will you learn that such folk neither know nor care about Scottish nationalism. By the way Jimmy, was Lockerbie the fault of the English too?
36

tumshie heid,

16/10/2009 09:29:28
#36 What you and your unionist pals haven't got to grips with is that sectarianism and blind obedience to a woman living in London and born into good fortune are not good reasons to stay within the union.
37

peter1958,

Glasgow 16/10/2009 13:26:53
tumshie, what you and your nationalist pals haven't got to grips with is sectarianism as it exists in Scotland today will not disappear if Scotland became independent. Also, is it not stated SNP policy that the Queen of Scotland will also remain head of state so presumably blind obedience will also remain a feature of post-independence Scotland.

Frankly tumshie, the SNP have avoided entirely the issue of what Scotland will be post-independence for fear of alienating their potential supporters in the country at large.

The time has come surely for the SNP to set out its own model constitution. It should endeavour at this stage to bring together all those crazy notions it has about the "sovreign will of the people" and spell out exactly what they mean - is the Queen going to be Head of State or have you another model in mind? Exactly what will be the relationship between the legal and executive estates? Will there be a "second chamber" and will an independent Scotland even recognise a Privvy Council bearing in mind that the Queen is proposed as Head of State? Fixed term elections, proportional representation or STV? How will conflicts of jurisdiction be resolved?

And just what is this dumb notion that Angus Robertson has that foreign armies and navies could "bed and breakfast" within Scottish held territory. For that matter a draft constitution can even advise if armed forces are required or not because there is certainly a large numbers of nats who see no need for them whatsoever in a modern Scotland. In fact even the question about NATO v neutrality could be addressed.

Can you get your head around those issues tumshie?
38

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 17/10/2009 03:04:52
#19 Peter1958

"Tom, you could also ask why Northern Ireland has chosen to remain part of the Union."

You could also ask how Northern Ireland is in anyway relevant to the debate about Scotland's constitutional future.

What ever decisions that sectarianism plagued province makes is hardly relevant to Scotland.

Even a Chimp in an Orange Sash could see that.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.