WHAT WERE MISTAKES IN YES 2014 CAMPAIGN?

I was reading Alex Salmond’s book The Dream Will Never Die today. It’s an excellent enjoyable read (you can buy it on Kindle) and I would highly recommend it. Alex has always been a clever and witty communicator and this book is a moving and detailed account of the last 100 days of the referendum campaign.

Salmond blames the infamous ‘vow’ (which totally went against the spirit of ‘Purdah’ rules) and the last minute intervention of Gordon Brown ultimately for the loss of the campaign as well as the gap closing in opinion polls slightly too early.

There is no doubt that Yes fought a superb campaign from intensive grassroots traditional campaigning through extensive use of social media. I thought we had done enough to win and I thought we would and no doubt like many others I was shocked and dismayed to see the negative results flow in from across the country.

Post referendum the Yes campaign’s zeal has pushed the SNP into extraordinary political dominance at this year’s General Election with the unionists all but wiped out and the stage set for a similar thumping for them by the SNP in the next Scottish parliament elections.

Now that some time has passed and the dust has settled I think it is appropriate to look back at the 2014 referendum and consider whether there were any tactical mistakes which we can avoid in the future.

I would say there are a number of areas of concern which need to be addressed.

The main reason for achieving independence would be that it would give Scotland the chance to set out our own stall internationally. We would also be able to control all tax and spending decisions and be able to set our own welfare and defence policy.

The point that we could cancel Trident and spend the money better elsewhere was made during the campaign. The point that we could not prevent future Tory Governments was also made and we pointed out that a squeeze on spending on the NHS in England could adversely affect our block grant in Scotland.

I’m not sure however that any distinctive international policy was articulated. What we did say was that we would remain in NATO and contribute to it’s efforts around the world.

This raises problems not least the fact that recent NATO actions have been unpopular in Scotland and in fact one of the reasons for becoming independent would be presumably to avoid the quagmire of Iraq and Afganistan and the ‘war for oil’.

Simultaneously the idea we could join an international organisation under a nuclear umbrella while at the same time taking a unilateral position on nuclear defence was a mixed one at best. It may be that this is technically possible but the political reality is that it is extremely unlikely. 

It also meant that our policy internationally in terms of military intervention would probably be roughly similar to the current one pursued by the British Government! In which case why become independent?

I have noticed a disturbing tendency amongst senior pro-independence politicians that when international questions come up they seem to slip into ‘British MP mode’ they say things like ‘this country’ when they mean the UK and talk as if the imperialist position is the only game in town.

The UK is not a country and we need to point it out at every opportunity. The policy of world imperialism is not in Scotland’s interests and it never has been yet it seems that people think it might be impolite to raise such an objection on Question Time and that it might not go down too well in England.

The problem is that it doesn’t help us in Scotland. When Alan Cumming and Alex Neil at different times said that they were comfortable with Britishness and the British flag they inadvertently handed the moral high ground to the likes of Michael Forsyth who had to point out that independence would actually end the British state.

Cumming is a fine actor but this intervention made us look quite absurd as did the time Alex Neil claimed to be proud to be British. (He was a lot more honest when he was calling George Robertson Lord Haw Haw!) I suspect that both of these efforts were intended to try and position the Yes campaign to gather No supporters to our ranks but I don’t think it helped our credibility one iota.

As Britain’s third party the SNP will be constantly appearing on Question Time. While it might be nice to be highly regarded in England it is not the purpose of the party. No-one joined the SNP because they liked Britishness and it’s not what I have campaigned for since 1987!

At every debate in the Scottish parliament and at the UK parliament independence supporting representatives need to point out that Scotland is a separate country with separate political objectives. If we don’t do that then people will simply not see a requirement for independence even if the economic arguments are all in our favour.

We should always mention the United Nations but more importantly we need to craft a defence policy and international policy which suits our status as a small country in the north of Europe and then argue for that.

While I understand that Alex Salmond is a supporter of the monarchy I also feel that the rigidity of the Yes campaign on this and the EU potentially lost us more votes than it gained.

I’m sure the Queen is a decent woman and I must admit that I wouldn’t particularly like to live in a museum or attend interminable official functions or live in a goldfish bowl existence so I don’t envy her either her existence or her huge financial fortune (I’d prefer to just win Euro Millions!).

My problem isn’t with the personages of the royal family (Charles also seems like a decent man) it is with the fact that republican views are constitutionally barred from representation. Most republicans would I’m sure mumble the words of the oath and think of it as a compromise worth taking if it means they can represent their constituents. I can understand the pressures and if I was ever elected as an MSP no doubt I would feel forced into doing the same thing.

The problem is that it’s simply morally wrong to start of any MSP’s career on a lie and a humiliating ragman’s roll type experience. They should declare an oath to serve the people of Scotland and if they choose to add a declaration of support for the monarchy that should be entirely optional. If not we aren’t a functional democracy just like Westminster which uses the House of Lords to subvert the electoral process as well as provide a cushy retirement package to every MP that reaches cabinet level rank.    

While I have never been overly concerned about the European Union the facts are that it quite obviously represents some level of threat to the sovereignty of all states. Is it worth sacrificing some power to gain influence in the EU? It may be but there is a legitimate argument to be had about it. Simply imagining that all of Scotland is happy to join the EU doesn’t recognise the diversity of our country’s opinions.

We need to make a grown up choice on both the EU and the monarchy and we could only make those choices if we have a referendum on them post-independence. It doesn’t have to be immediate but the principle should be there just as the oath should be removed as a democratic principle whether the present Queen remains our head of state or not.

I think we need to seriously consider all these points if we want to win a future referendum on independence and the first thing is that we should never, ever think like a British MP. We might be in the place, but it’s on a temporary basis until we’re somewhere better. Similarly being British is a choice not a geographical quirk. The word British itself comes from the ancient Roman term for England and if the English are offended on occasion by the fact that we want to leave their fond embrace that is a price worth paying for our freedom from a political state which has never represented our views properly as Scots and never will.

Farage gets Bum's Rush from Edinburgh: "They even hate the union jack."

Nigel Farage, the anti-European Union United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) leader, found himself in retreat on Thursday evening as dozens of protesters hounded him out of central Edinburgh.

Farage was finally whisked away in a police riot van under a tirade of abuse from a crowd of about 50 young demonstrators – students, anti-racist campaigners and activists in the 'Radical Independence' movement – after being forced to retreat not once, twice or three times, but four times. Farage was first forced out of the Canon's Gait pub on the Royal Mile after the landlord took fright as the demonstrators disrupted his casual press conference with shouts of "racist", "scum" and "homophobe".

Out on the street, as the fingers pointed and taunts escalated, he was rejected by one taxi and turfed out of a second. Then, finally, the harassed and ill-prepared handful of officers were forced to push him back into the Canon's Gait, slamming its front doors shut, as the demonstrators chanted: "Nigel, you're a bawbag, Nigel you're a bawbag, na, na, na, hey!" with gusto.

The etched sign above the Canon Gait's door read: "Enjoy your visit."

With further verses of "Ukip scum, off our streets" echoing in his ears, Farage was bustled into a police van under the glare of television camera lights. After gamely attempting to argue back, trying to hit back at the repeated accusations of racism and homophobia with protests of innocence, Farage finally had to admit his surprise.

"We've never, ever, ever had this kind of response. Is this a kind of anti-English thing? It could be," he said to a reporter. It wasn't. Not entirely. The protesters disagreed. Many said they were there to protest at Ukip's stance on immigration and the political backgrounds of Ukip's motley collection of local council candidates; others were there to protest against his party's obscure economic policies.

There was no violence, no punches thrown, no missiles lobbed. Rachel, a young woman in a wheelchair who had wheeled herself on to the Royal Mile to blockade the second taxi Farage tried to take, said simply: "Ukip are just bullshit."

Some were independence campaigners there to remind him of his nationality: after one, standing just a few feet from Farage, invited the Ukip leader to "shove your union jack up your arse", a flustered Farage said: "Clearly this is anti-British, anti-English. They even hate the union jack."

Farage had arrived at the Canon's Gait in buoyant mood, planning for his long-denied breakthrough into Scottish politics. Compared to the near-25% support in the English local elections, the highest his party has ever polled in Scotland is 5.2% in the 2009 European elections; in many others, Ukip support rests at under 1%.

The latest Ipsos Mori opinion poll, published in early May, found that just two Scots out of 1,001 would vote Ukip. He was hoping for a quiet, convivial briefing – hopefully with pint in hand – with the Scottish political press corps. This was to be the official launch of Ukip's campaign for the Holyrood parliamentary seat of Aberdeen Donside – a seat held very comfortably by the Scottish National party. "We've proved we can get votes in Wales, England and Northern Ireland, We're still untested in Scotland," he said.

"We've not had an opportunity to test Ukip policies with the Scottish people for a very long time." Asked about Ukip's chances, he was optimistic. "I wouldn't be at all surprised if we did quite creditably."

Less than 30 minutes after speaking those words, the MEP for South-East Counties was sitting hunched on the rear seat of a police riot van being driven off at speed, his plans to introduce Otto Inglis, Ukip's ever hopeful candidate for the Scottish parliament byelection on 20 June, forgotten.

Farage calls Scottish activist protesters ‘fascist scum’

UKIP leader Nigel Farage has described protesters who besieged him in an Edinburgh pub as "fascist scum".

Mr Farage had to be escorted from the Canons' Gait pub in a police van after angry confrontations on Thursday.

He told BBC Scotland the incident was deeply racist and displayed a total hatred of the English.

Mr Farage called on Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond to condemn the behaviour. The SNP said the UKIP leader had "lost the plot".

Mr Farage hung up during a telephone interview with the Good Morning Scotland programme on BBC Radio Scotland after being pressed about his lack of knowledge of Scottish politics and the low level of support for his party north of the border.

He later described the interview as "insulting".

Listen to it here and decide for yourself:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22566180

First Minister Alex Salmond said that Mr Farage's accusation of a "hate campaign" from the BBC during the radio interview showed it would be a "great mistake" to take "somebody of that mentality with any degree of seriousness".

Mr Salmond added: "We can frankly do without UKIP, who dislike everybody and know absolutely nothing about Scotland."

When asked if he condemned the demonstration against Mr Farage, the first minister said: "If there's been any law-breaking - and that's yet to be established - then obviously we condemn that, as we always do in Scotland, but you've got to get things into context.

"A student demonstration isn't the Dreyfus trial."

He should accept reality and declare himself an 'English nationalist' which is precisely what he is. @engyesscotland@nigel_farage
— Joe Middleton (@freescotlandnow) May 18, 2013

Nigel Farage's Scottish hounding was an antidote to fawning media treatment | Mike Small gu.com/p/3gva8/tw via @guardian
— Morna Simpson (@girlgeeks) May 18, 2013

UKIP have always been out of touch and patronising towards Scotland as I found when I spoke with a UKIP Euro MP on the radio after the SNP's first election victory in the Scottish parliament (see post below this) - JM.

POLITICAL RALLIES NEED TO INCLUDE EVERYONE

As someone who has been involved in helping organise such events in the past (through Independence First) I very much hope that this new rally on Saturday organised by http://www.independenceforscotland.com/ is a success and leads to victory in the referendum in 2014.

Obviously the website is very professional and the organisers have made good use of social networking to publicise and advertise the rally. They have also apparently attracted wide support from across the political spectrum with some very famous faces lined up to speak at the rally including the First Minister himself.

Nonetheless banning the Scottish Republican Socialist Movement (SRSM) from events (based on the opinions of someone like Jim Murphy) is entirely counter productive. 

The story is here: http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/scottish-independence-snp-under-fire-over-extremists-at-rally-1-2529585 and was also reported in the Glasgow Herald.

As a current member of the SNP and a former member of the SRSM I obviously have an interest in these developments.

Scottish republicanism is a legitimate political position to take which is supported by somewhere around 50% of the Scottish people. The British Queen has as much interest in Scotland as the Spanish King has to Catalonia and he made it clear where his loyalties lie this week. At the height of the devolution debate in the 70's 'our' Queen similarly distanced herself from Scotland and I'm sure would do the same again. Given the contemptuous title of England's Queen Elizabeth II it has always been clear where her personal loyalty has lay.

The British flag is a symbol of imperialism, racism and divide 'n' rule politics. Showing contempt for that flag by burning it is a legitimate political response and more honest than smiling wanly while it is thrust down our throats during sporting events where Scotland is excluded from participating as ourselves.

Brittania was the Roman name for England and Wales, not Scotland. Great Britain was always a device for expanding English power (a fact which was admitted by Jack Straw MP) at the expense of Scotland and Wales and it remains precisely that today.

All groups who support independence should have been made welcome at the rally. Past organisations (like IF) which organised events were deliberately set up on an entirely non-political basis so they could be made bullet-proof from divide 'n' rule style stirring by the British unionists and their allies in the press.

Radical elements are all part of what makes independence movements tick. The SNP is a broad church but it won't enthuse everyone by promoting a pro-European and pro-monarchist position or by watering down it's opposition to nuclear weapons. That radicalism needs to come from groups outside the SNP and the SRSM have always been 100% committed to Scottish independence and a republic in the tradition of John MacLean. He wasn't popular with the establishment either but his name lives on while most of his Brit loving supposed 'international socialist' contemporaries are deservedly gathering dust.
 
In his early years Salmond was a republican and part of the '79 group. Without the fire in his belly of those early experiences it is unlikely he could have risen to the position he holds today. The SNP should realise that it does not speak for everybody and welcome support from outside its ranks. Any group organising a rally needs to do the same thing otherwise it will ultimately be dictated to by a unionist lobby which ultimately includes low lifes like the BNP and the Orange Lodge (guess who organised the only jubilee street party in Glasgow!). Given the company they keep and the war mongering actions of the state they represent British unionists have no right to criticise any element of Scotland's independence movement.
 
If we want to gain the mass support recently demonstrated by activists in Catalonia then we need to widen our ranks to include every supporter of independence from the right to the left of political thought in Scotland. If we don't do that then we are very unlikely to win independence in 2014.

Salmond sets the record straight in Glasgow Herald Letter

From The Herald, Monday June 28, a letter from Alex Salmond:

Your report on my interview with another newspaper was headlined, in quotation marks, “Independence is not key aim’” (Herald, June 26), despite the fact that no-one – least of all myself – actually said this, and the reference to independence “no longer” being the SNP’s central aim was just silly.

I was in fact making exactly the opposite point – that the centre of gravity in Scottish politics is shifting towards independence not away from it.

A generation ago it was for an Assembly, then for a Parliament, then for Calman, now for fiscal responsibility, which is currently galvanising a range of opinion across Scottish society.

At each stage in that road, the SNP campaigned in favour of more powers for Scotland as well as pursuing the independence campaign. There has never been any contradiction in doing that – nor is there now.

Indeed, one of the essential ingredients of gaining more power for Scotland is the vigour of the independence campaign. It is the engine which fires the debate.

The publication of the Government Expenditure & Revenue Scotland report – showing in 2008/09 a Scottish current budget surplus of £1.3 billion, compared to a UK current budget deficit of £48.9 billion – is a strong illustration of the argument which both increases the urgency of fiscal responsibility as an alternative to a dismal decade of Westminster spending cuts, and also shifts the centre of gravity in Scottish politics towards independence.

Alex Salmond, Edinburgh

If Salmond is 'irrelevant' then so is Scotland

British Conservative leader David Cameron's remarks again show his party's irrelevance to Scotland. If Alex Salmond and by extension the SNP are "irrelevant" to a British general election then this shows up the fact that Scotland does not count within the current setup.

The SNP are currently Scotland's most popular party. They won the last Scottish election and the last Euro elections with the largest share of the popular vote. The Tories on the other hand have one MP in Scotland and might soon have zero. The SNP however could realistically under FPTP increase their numbers to 20-30 seats.

That makes the SNP a huge player in Scotland. If David Cameron continues to push this line then what he is actually saying is that no party in Scotland counts and that whatever way we vote does not matter in a UK election.

If that is so then the only logical option for Scots is independence, because otherwise he is right and we don't count at all within the UK setup where we are outvoted 10-1.

If the BBC go ahead with a debate and show it in Scotland without the SNP's participation then they will be wide open to legal action. It may be David Cameron's opinion that the SNP don't count but in reality it is his party that is the irrelevance to all Scots.

In Scotland this election is between Labour and the SNP. Who wins will have relevance to whether we move forward to independence or have a future of right wing rule. Cameron knows he is not popular up here and he also knows he has no hope of winning any election but he has no right to decide the scottish people's vote in advance of te actual election, nor has he any right to declare that the SNP are irrelevant when they have an excellent chance of winning the elections in Scotland!

--------

David Cameron has branded the Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond "an irrelevance" in the upcoming general election. His comments came after Mr Salmond predicted England would be "dancing to a Scottish tune" if the election delivers a hung Parliament with SNP MPs holding the balance of power.

But Mr Cameron insisted the only options for voters casting their ballot in any part of the UK was between continued Labour rule and a switch to Conservative government.

David Cameron's Conservatives are treating Scots with contempt

You have to laugh at the contradictory messages currently coming from the British media. On the one hand David Cameron is trying to dictate whether Alex Salmond gets an invite to the proposed TV debates:

David Cameron calls for Alex Salmond to be barred from TV debates

David Cameron has said Alex Salmond should be barred from a series of televised general election debates between the main party leaders despite Scottish National Party threats of legal action.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/6251864/David-Cameron-calls-for-Alex-Salmond-to-be-barred-from-TV-debates.html

On the other hand the Times pretends that he is desperate to woo Scotland, aye right! (Even Angus Mcleod can't quite believe it!).

David Cameron desperate to ‘seal the deal’ and win over the Scots

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6867080.ece

So it's a kick from a boot and a simpering smile and words of encouragement as well.

David Cameron's local puppet the pantomine dame Annabel Goldie tried to bring in her brand of comic relief:

"I have been delighted at the response to the message in my speech on Monday that the approaching General Election is a British election, for the British Parliament, for a British Prime Minister

"People are saying to me at Conference that that message is resonating beyond Scotland."

Only if your head is wedged firmly in the sand at Berwick! Poor old Goldie appears to be delusional.

She goes on:

"The SNP are irrelevant at a British General Election. Their influence on the British economy is virtually nil."

So is Scotland relevant? Not to Goldie it isn't.

"As a sideshow Alex Salmond, and he is a sideshow in the British General Election..."

"... I shall do all I can to persuade people in Scotland that at this British General Election they should be voting for a British Prime Minister."

So what relevance does your Scottish position hold then? Why on earth should we listen to Ms Goldie when both her and her leader treat our country with utter contempt.

http://www.scottishconservatives.com/news_press/speeches/annabel_goldie_speech_to_the_scottish_fringe-conservative_party_conference_manchester_2009.aspx

Speech to the 'Scottish fringe' that just about sums up the importance the Tories think Scotland has.

But let us not forget those organs of the British press determined to spread light and truth around the planet, well everywhere apart from Scotland obviously, for us it's spin, lies and distaste.

Gillian Bowditch: Allow Gaelic to thrive without taxpayers’ cash

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6869384.ece

Scottish Gaelic our once proud national language is just a figure of fun to Anglo-centric commentators, what a disgrace.

David Cameron has no right to dictate the relevance of the SNP. That is up to the people of Scotland to decide. He has no right to demand a rigged TV debate either which excludes our most important political party.

Scotland will not stand for politicians who ignore our opinions and our interests.

The fact the Tories have one solitary MP should give them cause to consider before trying to dictate our future to us.

Britain is busted and independence is normality. David Cameron has nothing to offer as a political Tweedle Dum to Labour's Tweedle Dee. Scotland does not want or need a pompous Tory boy who looks like he needs someone to skelp his lug. Tony Blair was bad enough and no other smirking opinion poll driven power mad spinner is required.

Excluding SNP from TV debate proves Scotland does not matter

I am pleased to hear that UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown is going to appear in a Prime Time TV debate. Unfortunately it also appears that broadcasters are attempting to exclude the most popular party in Scotland from that debate! This simply cannot be fair and must be inconsistent with the BBC's position as a politically independent broadcaster.

The idea that Scotland's views are irrelevant to a UK parliamentary election are a direct consequence of being in an unequal union with a country ten times our size. If the fiction that Scotland and Wales do indeed share an equal place in Britain is to be maintained then the SNP and Plaid Cymru must have an equal voice in this debate. Scotland is not a part of the cozy British three party consensus and to suggest that Scotland has no say whatsoever in picking the next Prime Minister is to indirectly prove the pointless of Britain as a political concept.

Those TV channels who allow such a blatantly discriminatory situation to exist are opening themselves up to legal action. They are also hastening their abolition since they are showing themselves up to be ignorant of the Scottish national interest. In such circumstances why retain a BBC if it is prepared to entirely ignore Scotland during a UK election where for the first time ever the SNP are amongst the leading contenders?

The choice is clear. Either include the SNP Government and maintain a semblance of political democracy or ignore Scotland altogether and hasten the end of both the BBC and the British Union.

SALMOND CALLS FOR OPTIMISM IN HOMECOMING YEAR

Alex Salmond has used his new-year message to appeal to Scots to show a “spirit of optimism” that would help to pull the country through the difficult economic times ahead in 2009. The First Minister, in a clear reference to the SNP’s core policy of independence, also expressed the hope that the same optimistic spirit would lead to Scotland “taking its rightful place in the world” as well as boost the Homecoming 2009 initiative by encouraging expatriate Scots to return.

Mr Salmond said that the Homecoming – with its 300-plus events across the country – would help Scotland turn a threatened tourism downturn into a visitor boom. Mr Salmond’s message was recorded at the National Library of Scotland in Edinburgh, which is hosting the Paths of Robert Burns exhibition until February, before it is taken on tour to venues throughout Scotland for the rest of 2009.

While the Homecoming initiative has been sparked by next month’s 250th anniversary of the birth of Burns, Scotland’s national poet, it has mushroomed into an all-Scotland promotion of all things Scottish and aimed at expatriate Scots.

Mr Salmond, speaking as he viewed the original manuscript of Auld Lang Syne in the National Library, said that the song was a masterpiece that was sung by hundreds of millions of people around the world to welcome each and every new year.

He added: “For many people, 2009 will be an enormous challenge, with the full impact of the economic downturn starting to bite. At times like this, therefore, it is even more important that we pull together as a nation. The economic storm clouds are gathering. But I know that we will weather this storm – and emerge even stronger, and well placed to prosper. We need to ensure Scotland becomes a more successful country, mitigating the downturn and leading the recovery.

“Homecoming is a chance for Scotland’s international family, and all who feel an affinity for our nation, to come back and reconnect with our heritage while also learning what being a citizen in Scotland in the 21st century actually means. I believe there is a spirit of optimism abroad that will pull us through the hard times, that will see Scotland take her rightful place in the world.”

A British business organisation (CBI) attempted to attack Salmond for remaining committed to a fairer taxation system as they claimed it might discourage investment, they also supported the British Governments position on nuclear power stations.

Unionists conduct shows a cynical lack of respect

Labour's decision to hold a crucial by-election during the traditional Glasgow holiday shows that they prefer to have elections without any candidates and even without any voters if it suits their purposes. If you don't want to be disenfranchised and live in Glasgow East, get a a postal vote.

Labour's Margaret Curran strongly attacked Alex Salmond for serving in two parliaments. No doubt they had a fair point at the time (though no doubt like Ian Paisley FM Salmond finds it handy to make the occasional visit to Westminster) but it seems a tad hypocritical that they are now rushing to do the same thing after all the genuinely local candidates ran for the hills.

Labour's own internal rules didn't allow dual roles. That is until they had an emergency meeting of their NEC and changed them. Suddenly it's quite OK to spend time in both parliaments, no doubt it will be a positive advantage by the end of the campaign.

Of course the media are taking their usual impartial stance with their coverage heavily in favour of Labour and constant pictures of Ms Curran (though given her miserable coupon that might not be the best idea!). During the proposed TV debate however I think we will see the true nature of Labour and their unionism. We got a taster with their other Glasgow MSP suddenly welcoming a 7 day festival devoted to the Orange Order. Great! Unless you are a Catholic or simply not a bigot.

Of course these issues are not crucial but they tend to suggest Labour will do anything to get re-elected. Luckily it's not up to them but to Glasgow's voters.

SNP Candidate John Mason, can he 'do a Govan' and get ripped into Labour's candidate on live TV? Let's hope so.

The only fundamental question in this by election for those voters is: 'Are you happy with what Labour have done with your area and their conversion via New Labour to a pseudo Conservative party?'

If not, then you have nothing to lose by kicking them where it hurts on the 27th July.

Why not give the Scottish party a chance? Why shouldn't Scotland run our own affairs? Labour have never explained what makes us uniquely incompetent among the peoples of the world in this area.

With independence we could revitalise Scotland, we certainly couldn't do any worse than the UK Labour Government which will soon be returning to the usual shade of Tory blue.

Of course it's that nice Mr Cameron, not the nasty Mrs Thatcher.

Er no, not any more he isn't. In this by-election Cameron decided to turn extremely nasty and had a kick at the poor, and just for good measure, fat people! Saying that they deserve all they get. Don't help, just ignore them.

The Tories have always blamed the poor and praised the rich but to pop up and spit on the locals is pretty unusual behaviour for a party which are supposedly campaigning for votes!

Then again it's not any real surprise because just like Labour the Tories only care about that bit of Britain where the most votes are, and it's not Scotland. That's why in a parliament in London where we are outvoted 10 to 1 the only sensible thing to do is to leave it but before then we need MP's who put Scotland's interests first.