Pages

Wednesday, 8 October 2014

David Cameron urges Scottish nationalists to accept referendum defeat - Telegraph



The Prime Minister rebukes Nicola Sturgeon after she claimed it was a matter of “when, not if” Scotland becomes independent.




Peter A Bell's insight:


Whether through a malicious purpose to deceive or mere stupidity David Cameron conflates two quite separate issues. Nobody is seriously contesting the referendum result. The Scottish Government certainly isn’t disputing the outcome and neither is the SNP. It is characteristically dishonest of David Cameron to suggest that they are.




But, as was foretold by observers of the political scene in Scotland more aware of the realities than any London-based politician ever could be, Cameron attempts to equate the unionist victory in the referendum campaign as a defeat for the entire independence movement in Scotland. It is not. It never could be.




It will come as no surprise to most people in Scotland to find that British politicians are totally baffled by the concept of a political principle. Having observed the behaviour of the species over a number of years, we would expect the likes of Cameron to be bewildered by the idea of politicians adhering to fundamental principles rather than readily sacrificing them on the altar of political expediency.




The restoration of Scotland’s rightful constitutional status is a matter of fundamental principle. It is not something that can be abandoned in the face of a setback such as a referendum defeat.




The other error that Cameron and his fellow British nationalists make is to suppose that the Scottish National Party and the independence movement are one and the same thing. This is partly due to plain ignorance and partly due to their folly in believing their own propaganda. In reality, the SNP is only one part of a much larger political movement which encompasses other political parties - such as the Scottish Greens and the Scottish Socialists - as well as numerous non-party political groups and countless individuals who are politically active to varying degrees.




Were Cameron and the rest of the Westminster elite even vaguely aware of the realities of Scotland’s politics they would realise that Nicola Sturgeon can no more deny the demand for another referendum than she can suspend the campaign for independence.




Cameron and his ilk are confused and uncomprehending because they are being confronted by true democratic power. They are accustomed to a form of politics that operates entirely within the context of a rigidly controlled party political system whose sole purpose is the preservation of the existing structures of power and privilege. They are used to popular participation in politics being no more than the occasional ineffectual scrawling of a cross on a ballot paper next to any of a number of options not one of which poses a meaningful threat to the ruling elites of the British state or the dominant economic imperative. They simply do not understand the kind of mass grass-roots activism that now characterises the independence movement in Scotland.




It is not Nicola Sturgeon who will decide that there is to be another referendum. Nor is it the SNP or even the Scottish Government. And it certainly isn’t David Cameron. The people of Scotland will decide. The politicians will just do as they are told.






See on telegraph.co.uk



via Tumblr http://ift.tt/1qg30BX

Tuesday, 7 October 2014

Rennie urges Labour and Tories to improve devolution offers



Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie has claimed plans to give extra powers to Scotland risk being held back by “forces of Conservatism” - including the Labour Party.




Peter A Bell's insight:


Here we go again!




When the Scottish Parliament was first reconvened back in 1999 it was, according to unionists, the very exemplar of devolution. It was not long, however, before those same politicians who had lauded Scotland’s devolution settlement as the greatest thing since universal suffrage started acknowledging its deficiencies. And so we got the Calman Commission - rigged, as these things must be within the context of the British state, to ensure that the power and privilege of the British state’s ruling elites was not put in the slightest jeopardy.




Roll forward only a relatively short time and, before the watered-down Calman proposals are even fully implemented, the British parties are to found, once again, grudgingly admitting that this settlement too is inadequate and scrambling to cobble together a new devolution package. We are then treated to the unedifying spectacle of the British parties squabbling over which of their incoherent and largely unworkable plans allows them to lay claim to the title of “the party of devolution” at the same time as they try to present that they are united in their determination to deliver “more powers” despite none of them being able to say what these powers might be, when they might be delivered, or how they might benefit Scotland.




Now, in the wake of a No vote in the referendum, they are back to the same squabbling. Squabbling which totally misses the essential point that it is not British politicians such as Willie Rennie and his Red and Blue Tory allies who should be deciding these matters anyway. It is for the people of Scotland to decide what powers their parliament should have.




This is the same Westminster elite that has already got it wrong so often that there is absolutely no rational reason to hope that they might somehow get it right on this occasion. Even if their definition of what is right did relate to what is best for Scotland, they have proved themselves incapable of figuring this out. The reason being that they are not in any way concerned about what is best for Scotland. Their sole concern is the preservation of the structures of power and privilege which define the British state.




British politicians will NEVER devise a satisfactory devolution settlement. There is no satisfactory devolution settlement.




Which makes the comments about “uncertainty” from Alistair Carmichael look all the more ludicrous. This dullard whines about the uncertainty supposedly caused by the popular independence movement and pro-independence politicians’ adherence to the democratic principle of self-determination. Meanwhile, he remains dumbly unaware that the real uncertainty is caused by the endless constitutional tinkering of British politicians as they frantically try to stem the rising tide of civic nationalism, progressive politics and democratic activism which they justifiably regard as a threat to their power and privilege.




Will Alistair Carmichael be the last person in Scotland to realise that the constitutional question can only be settled with independence?






See on heraldscotland.com



via Tumblr http://ift.tt/1vM9gWz

Sillars: ‘New mandate for independence’ in 2016



WESTMINSTER won’t let Scotland stage another referendum and the SNP should be ready to negotiate independence if it wins a majority at Holyrood in 18 months, a former Deputy leader of the party has said.




Peter A Bell's insight:


Jim Sillars is undoubtedly correct to assume that the British state will do all in its power to prevent the people of Scotland ever again being permitted to have their say on the matter of their nation’s constitutional status. He is also perfectly correct to point out that the electoral process is an alternative means by which the people can make their voice heard. Where Mr Sillars goes wrong, in my view, is in emphasising the parliamentary route to independence over a new referendum.




It is true that a majority of pro-independence candidates returned to Holyrood in 2016 could be interpreted as constituting a mandate to sue for independence. Particularly if this also involved a clear majority of the votes cast with a high turnout. Let’s say, 55% on an 85% turnout. The fly in the ointment is the word “interpreted”. If such a vote is open to interpretation then there will always be those who are prepared to dispute the legitimacy of any claim that it is, in fact, a vote for independence.




Legitimacy is crucial. Which is why we should be working towards achieving a massive vote for the SNP in the 2015 UK election and an even bigger vote for pro-independence parties in the 2016 Scottish election. Not to directly validate a mandate to sue for independence, but to prevent the British state denying the people of Scotland their democratic right of self-determination. And, just as importantly, to prevent them rigging Scotland’s electoral system so as to return power at Holyrood to the “safe pair of hands” that is British Labour.




Jim Sillars is only half right when he says that we were “given” the 2014 referendum by Westminster. It is at least partially true to say that the people of Scotland took that referendum by the way they voted in the 2011 election. We have to do so again. But we must do so even more explicitly.




When the people of Scotland go to the polls in 2015 and 2016 we must do so with the clear purpose of sending and unmistakable message to the ruling elites of the British state. That message is that, notwithstanding the result of the 2014 referendum, sovereignty yet rests with Scotland’s people. We must assert our democratic right of self-determination.




We must insist that the people of Scotland alone have the legitimate authority to determine the powers of their parliament and, by means of a written constitution, the manner in which that power is exercised.




We must demand another referendum and, thereby, put beyond question the legitimacy of the process by which Scotland’s rightful constitutional status is restored.






See on scotsman.com



via Tumblr http://ift.tt/1s4Tln8

Monday, 6 October 2014

New Forth Crossing to cost £50m less



Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon today revealed that the overall cost for Scotland’s flagship project will be £50 million lower than the previous budget estimate made in 2013.




Peter A Bell's insight:


When did you ever hear of a UK Government project being brought in on schedule and under budget?






See on edinburghnews.scotsman.com



via Tumblr http://ift.tt/1urWtKL

Sunday, 5 October 2014

Police probe postal referendum vote counting claim



POLICE SCOTLAND are investigating claims that Better Together campaigners breached electoral law by counting postal votes during the Scottish independence referendum.




Peter A Bell's insight:


I note from the below-the-line comments that many British nationalists are outraged by the fact that Police Scotland are investigating an allegation of serious wrong-doing. They appear to consider themselves above the law. It would be gratifying to think that they might shortly be disabused of such arrogant notions.






See on scotsman.com



via Tumblr http://ift.tt/1rXZjpZ

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

Gordon Brown and David Cameron accused of 'smashing' the Union - Telegraph



Labour peer Lord Glasman tells a Tory conference fringe meeting that both parties have acted in their short-term political interests during the Scottish independence debate without thought to the consequences.




Peter A Bell's insight:


Am I the only one to notice that, now the referendum is over we find all manner of political commentators and analysts have suddenly discovered the deep-seated problems with the union that they were happy to deny during the campaign?






See on telegraph.co.uk



via Tumblr http://ift.tt/1wTlv4R

Thursday, 11 September 2014

Last word

As we move into the last few days of the referendum campaign, I wonder if there is much more to say. Surely, with all the millions of words that have been written, everything that might be said on the matter has already been said many times over. The lies of the No campaign have been exposed. Their scare stories have all been comprehensively debunked. The manifold positive arguments for independence have been stated and restated in every way imaginable.

But still there remains the nagging feeling that there's something that has been left unsaid. The sense that there is some concept or some form of words not previously thought of that might move the remaining undecideds and perhaps even get through to a few of the more open-minded among No voters. I have a profound fear, which I'm sure is shared by other independence campaigners, of waking up on the morning of 19 September with a big cartoon light-bulb over my head illuminating the absolute clincher of an argument that had not previously occurred to me.

This, of course, is all tied up with my absolute dread of a No vote. Having reflected long and hard on the consequences of failure to grasp this opportunity at this time, it is only natural that I should be deeply concerned. The concern remains even as the possibility of a No vote recedes. And it has certainly receded. There is a thrum in the air that tells me to be ever more confident of victory. Almost as if events are about to unfold that are of such magnitude that the vibrations of the future can be felt in the present. The talk now is not so much of a Yes win as of how big that win can be.

As confidence grows, zeal diminishes. By which I do not mean that my commitment to the cause of restoring Scotland's rightful constitutional status is lessened. Nor that I suppose there can be any let-up in the campaign to persuade people to vote Yes. I mean only that I am now somewhat more inclined to be patient with obstinate No voters. More ready to sympathise with the plight of those who have succumbed to the counsel of fear. More sad than frustrated that they have not been inspired by the possibility of creating a better politics and a fairer society.

And I am well aware that it is no more than the possibility of positive change that is in prospect with a Yes vote. Even if there were any truth in the weary myth of utopian promises from the Yes campaign, I am far too long in the tooth to be taken in by such things. But I am mindful that we are faced with two options in this referendum. And the possibility of positive change must trump the impossibility of positive change every time.

I have little time for those who argue that a Yes vote will make no difference because politicians are all the same and we would simply be trading one bunch of venal, self-serving careerists for another of the same ilk. This is an argument that disregards the nature of the transformation which the referendum has wrought in Scotland's political environment. The old politics is already dead in Scotland. It is just waiting to be buried so that a new politics can develop in the conducive atmosphere which now exists. A Yes vote sounds the death knell for the old order and the old ways. A No vote restores and revivifies them.

The "politicians are all the same" line is vacuous in any case. It is the resort of those who seek to mask the intellectual indolence which prevents them analysing and differentiating by adopting an air of world-weary cynicism. A facade which the naive often mistake for political sophistication.

Independence is self-evidently right in and of itself. It is, after all, the normal status of a nation. But independence is not a solution to any problems in and of itself. It is merely the gateway to being able to address Scotland's  problems in our own way and according to the needs and priorities of Scotland's people - the people who call Scotland home.

Those needs and priorities are not significantly different from those of people in the rest of the UK. Our attitudes and values are much the same. But the deeply ingrained political culture of the British state is such that those attitudes and values are all but totally excluded from the process of formulating public policy. The needs and priorities of people are not addressed. They are subordinated to political expediency and an overarching economic imperative.

By virtue of its separate democratic institutions and processes, Scotland has developed a distinctive political culture in the sense that, at least relative to the British state, the attitudes and values of people find more effective expression and their needs and priorities are therefore better addressed.

Independence is the prerequisite to allowing that distinctive political culture to grow and develop. A No vote empowers those who regard this more responsive, participative political culture as anathema. A No vote takes the awesome power that the people of Scotland will hold in their hands for fifteen precious hours on Thursday 18 September and hands it to a small elite who detest the very idea of such power being possessed by anyone but themselves.

I like this idea of independence being but a stage in the process of our society growing and developing. Almost like a metamorphosis. We need to work our way out of the cocoon of the British state in order to flourish.

This is not a destructive process. Nothing is destroyed by Scotland bringing its government home. Notions of shared history being "lost" are patently ludicrous. History cannot be lost. It is not a concrete thing. It is not a series of events. (And even if it is viewed as such then those events cannot be "unhappened".) It is an ongoing process. The past is no more fixed than the future. It is constantly changing as every day that passes becomes a new part of the past; adding to it and, thereby, unavoidably changing it.

The past only appears fixed if it is viewed from the perspective of a particular point in time. There is no rational reason why one arbitrarily selected vantage point should be any more valid than another.
We are both the product of and the makers of the past. As individuals and as societies we are formed by our history. And that which is formed by history in turn forms history. History is never lost. It is always part of us. But we grow and change nonetheless.

That is what Scotland needs to do. We need to grow and develop.

Independence is, in fact, a creative process. It is not about severing relationships. It is about redefining and reforming and renewing relationships in a way that is better suited to our times and our circumstances. It is about giving relationships a form that takes due account of how history has changed us since the time when those relationships were first forged.

It's not as if independence is some outlandish exercise in madcap political adventurism. It is part of a very familiar process. It is a path that has been trod by scores of nations since the collapse of European (and Soviet) imperialism. It is simply the next step in a quite mundane political and historical process that Scotland has been subject to for several years, if not decades. Those who cite the age of the union as if this was somehow relevant should note that the independence movement is at least as old.

The historical process that is in train will run its course. Nothing now can prevent Scotland becoming an independent nation again. In the same way that reconvening the Scottish Parliament subtly but decisively changed the Scottish people's sense of themselves; and in the same way that the referendum campaign has transformed Scotland's politics, so the asking of the referendum question has altered forever the dynamics of a political union which is visibly disintegrating under the strain of even this entirely peaceful, lawful, democratic challenge.

There is no going back. The past is a place that no longer exists. There is no alternative route - as the laughable shambles of the British parties' proposals for the next round of pointless constitutional tinkering amply demonstrates. The only way is Yes. To vote No is, apart from anything else, to deny political reality. 

I may not be saying anything new here. I may not have swayed any opinions by what I have written. But I have said what had to be said. And I'll keep on saying it right up until the polls close at 22:00 on Thursday 18 September 2014. By which time I hope enough people will have got the message to ensure that the result is a resounding Yes.