Showing posts with label Independence Convention. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Independence Convention. Show all posts

Monday, May 05, 2008

VICTORY FOR INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT - REFERENDUM IS COMING



In a stunning victory for democratic politics and the right of the Scottish people to rule theirselves the Scottish Labour party have declared that they WILL support a referendum on Scottish independence.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2246882.0.0.php

Congratulations to all my colleagues in Independence First and the Scottish Independence Convention and the SNP, Greens and SSP etc for moving us to a place where the unionists can no longer stop an Independence Referendum.

There remain questions, will Labour try to run their own rigged referendum? Will Wendy do another U Turn?

The Lib Dems and Tories must have severe egg on their faces now. After all the Libs said they wouldn't get in Government with the SNP because of a referendum (on Brown's orders delivered by Sir Ming), yet here's their auld pals going for it!

Similarly the Tories have joined with Labour in a commission which refuses to discuss independence and rules it out as an option and yet suddenly Labour pull the rug out from under it and say not only is independence an option (a message from back benchers, UK MP's and the STUC conference) that there will definitely be a vote on it before the Wendy Commission even brings forward any proposals.

Fantastic stuff. As I say congratulations to everyone who was on the right side of this debate in the past. Our goal has come much closer, I for one will be having a few drinks tonight to celebrate.

Independence vs dependence? Normal powers against an outdated unloved undemocratic union? We can't lose.

Monday, February 18, 2008

BROWN SAYS BRITAIN MIGHT TRY AND TAKE POWERS BACK

Report in Scotsman

Devolution review 'may lead to loss of Holyrood powers'

GORDON Brown yesterday backed a review of Scottish devolution – but suggested it could mean the return of some powers to Westminster.

The Prime Minister gave his public support for the first time to the Scottish Constitutional Commission, the body which will be set up to look into Scottish Parliament's powers.Mr Brown accepted there might be a case for some financial controls, including new tax-raising powers, to be handed over to Holyrood from Westminster.But he also said the review would examine whether Holyrood should lose control in some areas, particularly over terrorism or agricultural diseases, to Westminster.

Report in Herald

We should be very wary of allowing the UK Government to revisit the Scotland Act. The Welsh Act has already been re-visited by BritGov and they took the opportunity at that point to fiddle the election system to stop people standing on the FPTP and PR Lists, a clear attempt to weaken the smaller parties and strengthen Labour who tend to do better FPTP.

Powers over 'anti-terrorism' are already held (and abused) by the UK Government. This is a chimera behind which GB can try and take over other inconvenient powers such as say the right to refuse planning permission to new nuclear power stations. Any process of delivering greater powers for Scotland has to be led from here because the UK Government simply cannot be trusted to act honestly.

The Scottish Constitutional Convention (devolution version) called for powers over broadcasting and was supported by the scottish branches of Labour, Lib dems and Tories yet mysteriously when we actually got to the bill those powers were removed.

If we want to guarantee the significant extra powers that we need ie foreign affairs and proper control over all our finances then the obvious answer is to demand independence.

Taking more powers along that process seems logical but it possibly encourages the idea that the UK could be trusted not to interfere in other areas. As we can see from these comments we CANNOT trust Labour or the UK Government one iota and that has effectively been our experence of British rule for the last 300 years.

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Scotland has ignored oil opportunities

Your Letters (Herald) January 03 2007

In 1974 I went to the Middle East to work as a civil engineer. I had been a lecturer at Strathclyde University, and had actively supported the SNP. I authored the 1972 booklet, The Reality of Scotland's Oil, which drew attention to the potential benefits that an independent Scotland could expect from the great oil wealth discovered in the North Sea. Of course this booklet, and the SNP's own well-researched economic claims in their It's Scotland's Oil campaign, were roundly rubbished by the unionist press (including The Glasgow Herald).

We now know that even in the 1970s our unionist politicians knew the truth of the SNP's claims but were determined to hide this from voters.

In 1975, the Middle East was a fairly undeveloped area with little in the way of infrastructure and services. That is why I, and thousands of other British engineers, were going there. The region's oil wealth had risen greatly in value after the 1973 Arab/Israeli war, and this was now being invested frantically in the construction of roads, ports, water and drainage schemes, power stations, desalination plants, hospitals, schools and universities. Later, it became luxury hotels, shopping malls, apartment blocks, libraries and museums, business parks and theme parks; now even the world's tallest building. The tangible fruits of their oil wealth are there for all to see. Their worldwide investment portfolios are even more impressive. Millions of people now go to the Gulf countries on holiday and are no doubt astonished at what they find in cities such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Muscat, Doha and Bahrain. Not as astonished as I am, since I first saw all these places in the 1970s.

In all this, where stands Scotland, itself a major oil producer for 30 years? World oil production is around 0.6 tons/year/head of world population. The figure for the US has averaged 1.2 tons/year/head. But the vast majority of countries are at nil or less than 1.0.Over the past 10 years (and for a good number of years before that) Scotland has produced an average of around 20 tons of oil/year/head of population. For comparison, let us look at the mega-rich Arab Gulf countries. For Kuwait and the UAE, the figure is around 55; for Saudi Arabia, it is 23. The Norwegian figure is way up there with the big boys at around 30 tons/year/head, which helps explain how they have managed to build up a heritage fund in excess of £100bn for future generations, while still being now Europe's most prosperous country. So you can see that Scotland has been (in oil production terms at least) in the big league.

So where has Scotland gone wrong? Why are we the only country in the world whose population has stayed static for the past 50 years while the world's population has soared from 2.5 billion to 6 billion? Why have we had, at 1.8%, the lowest average GDP growth in western Europe over the past 30 years? Why is it that, of all the countries of western Europe, only in Scotland is male life expectancy still below 70 years? It is the same with indicators such as the percentage of people either unemployed or not in employment through incapacity, our car ownership rate and other measures of economic wellbeing.

All that oil wealth we produced, oil wealth that transformed the Gulf countries and Norway, has simply passed us by. We even suffer the annual indignity of being taunted by our unionist leaders about how much we are indebted to a subsidy from England for our very survival as one of western Europe's poorest countries. I used to think that there was something wrong with Scottish voters that so many could be so easily fooled and deceived, election after election, especially by the Labour Party. But at least they had an excuse – like those who voted for the war in Iraq. I now see that the real "dummies" in Scotland have been our own business and commercial people.

They have, for 30 years, totally failed to see the economic opportunities that would have arisen in an independent oil-rich Scotland. A trip to the Middle East would soon put them right. The economic opportunities, and the best oil-related jobs, were snapped up by London and the south-east, where control of our industry lay, and they didn't notice.

Scotland still has a lot of oil left to be produced and it has become very, very valuable. In this coming year, "energy security" will come to be recognised as an important quality for a country to have. Scotland will have that in spades. Perhaps in 2007 our business leaders, and even the voters, will finally get the message.

Nick Dekker, 1 Nairn Way, Cumbernauld.

Monday, December 04, 2006

Harry Reid joins the Convention

One of Scotland’s most eminent journalists, Harry Reid, has joined the Scottish Independence Convention, throwing his weight behind the campaign for a referendum and proclaiming his belief that the Treaty of Union is dead.

Mr Reid is a former editor of The Herald who ran the paper during its acclaimed campaign for a Yes/Yes vote in the 1997 devolution referendum. He has since written authoritative books on the Church of Scotland and the state of Scottish football. His latest book, Deadline, is a fast-selling history of the Scottish press.

He explained his decision to embrace independence: “I’ve been a ‘fellow traveller’ for a year or so now, yet somehow I’ve never quite faced up to what both my heart and my head have been telling me: that an independent Scotland could – and almost certainly would – be a better Scotland. I further believe that the Union is finished, and that England could benefit greatly from rediscovering itself by going through the potentially positive process of becoming English rather than British.

“And then my old friend and colleague Murray Ritchie bludgeoned me into writing this short piece. SO LET ME COME OUT AND SCREAM IT: I BELIEVE IN, AND NOW I EARNESTLY DESIRE, AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND.”

He said there were many reasons for this, some subtle, some crude, some cerebral, some emotive, some obscure, some historical.

“But the clincher for me has been the way this man Blair – surely the worst British leader in living memory – has been responsible for the worst thing I can recall the British state doing. That is, the reckless and illegal invasion of a sovereign foreign country, Iraq. I’m not sure if the invasion would have been justified had our security been genuinely at risk, but without doubt a case could have been made. Whereas the case that Blair presented was utterly false.
“And it was easy enough to invade, easy enough to topple Saddam: but how to secure the peace and how to construct a new and stable Iraq? How to persuade that country’s people – those of them who have not been slaughtered - that their life is better and the invasion has been beneficial? Not a thought seems to have been given to these crucial policy decisions. And thus, for the people of Iraq, life has slipped towards the abyss.

“The invasion of Iraq has been supremely and horrendously counter-productive. Our fine military have been shamelessly sent on a grotesque fool’s errand, a mission that was supposed to help us defeat terrorism but is instead creating and mentoring a whole new generation of terrorists.

“And what has this to do with an independent Scotland? It is quite simple. An independent Scotland would never ever misuse its power in this manner. I could never imagine, in a thousand years, an independent Scotland sending its army to invade a far-off country on such phoney pretexts.

“Iraq must dominate our current political agenda. But as I have tried to explain, Iraq is relevant to our constitutional debate.

“There are many other, far more positive, arguments for Scottish independence and I look forward to discussing these in the months ahead. The key point in the here-and-now is this: the British state – and it pains me to write this – has done something that is seriously wrong and very stupid. A Scottish state would never have behaved in this way.”

Murray Ritchie, convention convener, welcomed Mr Reid to the campaign. “Harry’s an intellectual heavyweight. He has thought through the arguments for and against independence and, like most of Scotland’s leading thinkers, reached the conclusion that the benefits will be overwhelmingly in favour. We are delighted to welcome him to the winning side.”

from Scottish Independence Convention www.scottishindependenceconvention.com