FREEDOM!!!! [3]

To be blunt if the NO campaign are going to try to use North Ireland as a political tool in this debate they are complete fuckwits who haven't got a clue the fire they are playing with.

I've been wondering about that....

  

So, what side will win the referendum, Petty?

I cant tell you, it'll wreck the continuum.   


Seems Labour dont learn lessons- in the last Scottish parliament election they tried to play the man and not the ball and attacked the SNP as a one man band and went after Salmond- it backfired spectacularly and the SNP got a landslide.
In England they tried to rubbish UKIP by attacking Nigel Farage, and claiming UKIP was a one man band it backfired spectacularly.

And now, this-

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/10446553_664232836988060_5711152875566438167_n.jpg

'A UK government booklet putting the case for the union is to be posted to every home in Scotland at a cost of £720,000.
It said the 16-page booklet would set out the "positive case" for Scotland remaining part of the UK.
But it does not mention any of the new powers which Scots have been promised if the voters reject independence.' BBC

So an expensive booklet to tell us nothing.  


In contrary to all the scare stories about North Sea oil winding down-

'An oil and gas explorer has been given approval to develop a major North Sea field.
Premier Oil will drill 22 wells at the Catcher field, 100 miles off the coast of Aberdeen.
It is hoped the field could produce about 100m of barrels of oil.'- BBC

Slowly but surely the YES vote keeps creeping up-

'THE prospect of David Cameron returning as Prime Minister at the next general election would persuade Scots to vote for independence, according to a new poll.
The Yes campaign moved ahead in the Survation survey when voters were asked to consider how they would vote in the referendum if they were certain Mr Cameron would be returned to Downing Street at the 2015 election.

The poll of 1,004 people found that 44 per cent would vote Yes, 38 per cent would vote No and 18 per cent were undecided. When undecided voters are removed, Yes has a majority, with 54 per cent, and No stands at 46 per cent.
The survey for the Daily Record newspaper, conducted between June 6 and 10, also showed a tight gap between the two sides when voters were simply asked to consider the question on the ballot paper: Should Scotland be an independent country?
It found that 39 per cent would back Yes, 44 per cent vote No and 17 per cent are undecided. Excluding undecided voters puts Yes on 47 per cent and No on 53 per cent.

The result shows a narrowing of the gap between the two sides since the last Survation poll in May, when support for Yes was 44 per cent and No stood at 56 per cent.'- The Scotsman


Seems Cameron is so desperate he is even trying to enlist the Queen to help his case-

'THE Queen twice declined requests by Prime Minister David Cameron to support the Union in keynote speeches, it was claimed today.
She insisted she had to remain neutral in the referendum debate, according to magazine Private Eye.
Her confidante and private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt has set up a taskforce to ensure that there is no "Nobama" moment.'- Daily Record


Worth noting both these stories come from pro-union papers, I wonder if support for the union in the scottish press is wavering as editors start to think they might be getting out of step with their readers.
Especially the Daily Record which is a working class Labour paper.

  

I do wish people would ask permission before taking my photo!   (The kitten was fine though, more than fine, delicious and I have a new fur hat    )

Never trust a faery!

'One of the strangest accounts of warfare must be August 1598's Blar Thraigh Ghruinneirt - the Battle of Gruinart.
Normally the mention of fairies conjures up images of elfin-like little people who decorate spider webs with dew drops, or reward a child for a lost tooth.
But the fairy that appeared at Gruinart was more likely to be found knocking teeth out than collecting them.
The battle was the last significant clan conflict fought on Islay. It pitted Sir Lachlan Mor MacLean, the 14th Chief of Duart, against his nephew Sir James MacDonald of Islay.

Legend tells of Dubh Sith - the Black Fairy - arriving from the nearby island of Jura just before the battle began and offering his services as an archer to MacLean.
The chieftain insulted the fairy and sent him away.
The enraged Dubh Sith then joined MacDonald's side and went on to succeed in shooting and killing MacLean. The spot where he is said to have died is marked by a cairn today.
MacDonald went on to win the battle.'- BBC

'THE Yes campaign is within touching distance of a historic victory in the independence referendum, according to a new poll, which puts the two sides almost neck and neck.
The Panelbase survey found a record 43% of voters now say they will back independence on September 18, compared to 47% voting No.
The figures are 48% for Yes and 52% for No once undecided voters are removed, suggesting the Yes camp needs just a two-point swing for victory.'- Herald


'THREE times as many people trust Holyrood to make decisions in the interests of Scotland as opposed to politicians at Westminster, a poll has revealed.
When asked who they trusted most to make decisions in Scotland’s best interests, 52% of Scots said Holyrood, while 17.3% said Westminster, according to the study by Survation.
When the 30.7% who said they did not know were excluded, 75% trusted Holyrood more while 25% preferred Westminster.
Amongst those who voted for the SNP in the 2011 Scottish Parliament election, 82.3% said they trusted Holyrood more to make decisions in the best interests of Scotland.
More than half (51.9%) of Labour supporters also preferred the Edinburgh parliament over that in London.'- The Scotsman

Some interesting results  of a poll of 3000 people-

'In Scotland, 62% thought an independent Scotland should keep the same King or Queen as England, while 79% of Scots said they should continue to use the pound.
The survey indicated almost 70% of people in England and Wales believed an independent Scotland should be allowed to share the pound.'- BBC

Seems the people of England are typically a lot more sensible and level headed than the UK government are!

A good example of where London can be a problem not just for Scotland but for everywhere in the UK that is not London-

'Raising interest rates to counter soaring London house prices could put Scotland's economic recovery at risk, according to an analysis.
The Bank of England signalled last week that interest rates may rise this year.
It came amid concern London's property market is overheating, with prices increasing far faster than elsewhere.
But the economists also identified a number of risks which they said threatened the sustainability of the recovery, and which resulted in the institute lowering its 2015 forecast marginally from 2.3% to 2.2%

Of the risks, the institute said it was most concerned about the impact of the London property market.

The Office for National Statistics said on Tuesday that property prices in London are rising at an annual rate of 18.7% compared with 9.9% across the UK as a whole. In Scotland, the figure was 4.8%.
But it is the boom in the London housing market that causes us most concern. We believe the Bank of England must avoid raising interest rates on that account.

"With Scottish house prices hardly rising at all, it is inappropriate for the recovery to be dampened across the UK for what is clearly a local or regional issue centred on London." - BBC


At least they found a plus point in the figures though-

'evidence that real Scottish wage growth appeared to have become positive in 2013 while UK real wage growth has remained negative for the past three years.
Prof Ashcroft added: "This may be due to a faster growth in labour productivity in Scotland. If so, the prospects for Scottish household spending might be a little rosier than in the UK."


Lance, as a Londoner working in the financial sector (when not moonlighting as an international spy!) whats your take on the figures?

For anyone who might doubt my entirely authentic accounts of Scottish life, with our crabbit institutions and devotion to buckie- a headline from todays BBC Scotland webpage-

'Scottish Parliament welcomes 'Buckfast Bees'

The Scottish Parliament is to have its own batch of honey bees.
The Buckfast Bees - which take their name from the abbey where the tonic wine is made - are being housed in Holyrood's own hives.- BBC

I assume this is part of a backup plan for independence, in-case the buckie brewers get uppity and we need to start making emergency supplies of our own.    

Ex-Tory PM John Major has entered the independence debate- the man who said in opposition to devolution in 97 "we have 24 hours to save the union" has said Scotland is led by a 'mad man'- so insulting all those who voted for the SNP at the last Scottish elections (which was the majority of Scots) and all those planning on or thinking of voting Yes. He went on to say-

""We have fought wars together more often, and more recently, than we have fought against one another.
We were at war centuries ago, which is - if I may be brutally frank - why I find it rather sad that the Scottish National Party chose the anniversary of Bannockburn for the vote - presumably to maximise the opportunity for any anti-English sentiment that may exist."

This is disgraceful, as he knows fine well why the referendum is happening when it is.

When the SNP first got into power they wanted it then, but as they were leading a minority party they could not get the bill passed the combined votes of all the other parties.
So they had to wait until 2011 when they won a majority to pass it.

The main concern of everyone at this point was the global financial collapse, and the SNP pledged in the run up to the election, in the face of Labour claims they would only be focused on independence not the economy, that they would not hold the referendum until the second half of the parliament, because the people expected and wanted their government to deal with the financial problems first and foremost.

This is now the second half of the term- Its probably difficult for John Major to comprehend the notion of a party keeping their election promises but that is all the SNP are doing.

It could not have been held next year because that is the UK General Election.
It could not have been held earlier because of the European elections.

There also had to be time for debate and for all the sides to make their case to the people.

So Autumn.

I suspect the SNP hierarchy view its coinciding with Bannockburn with mixed feelings, it might appeal to the hardcore independence people, but for the average voter its off putting Braveheart nonsense.

But for Major, who is not a stupid man, and knows this fine well, to be trotting out this divisive stuff is worrying.

It has been the current theme of the No campaign- to claim the referendum is diving Scotland, creating wounds.
And they have taken to directly attacking and insulting Salmond personally, in the last week we've had Darling comparing him to Kim Jong Un and the SNP nationalism to that of Nazi Germany.
We've had days of news and media coverage about the abusive responses on twitter form so called 'cybernats' to Rowling over her donating 1 million to NO, no excuses for those sending abuse but the press completely ignored the abusive received by the ordinary couple of lottery winners who donated 5 million to the YES campaign, or the Church of Scotland Moderator who said he had received the same sort of messages in equal measure from those on both sides.

The BBC Scotland website suddenly, coinciding with this divisive message being prmoted by NO, was full of polls and charts showing how divided everyone is, whilst only telling half the story (and it was discovered the NO campaign had been given use of BBC facilities to make ad campaigns, so no signs of bias at the BBC there!) and we've had Cameron standing with Swedish, Chinese, and US leaders one after the other, selling God alone knows what of the existing UK in return for them saying a line in support of the Union.

This is their new positive campaign?

And they wonder why they are slipping in the polls week on week?
If they are going to try to trick us with these sort of tactics they need to be better political magicians than this.

But worst of all this nasty campaign tactic carries the danger of creating divisions or the perception of them where non previously existed. Major claiming the referendum is timed to whip up anti-english sentiment is a stupid thing to do no matter the result, and it smacks of desperation.

Remember the Treasury claiming the set up costs for an independent Scotland would be 2.7 billion?

Remember the man whose research it was based on calling that figure 'utter fabrication'.

Well now the same Professor of economics from the London School of Economics has made a report commissioned by a leading Scottish Newspaper, the Sunday Post, to come up with what he thinks will be the actual costs-

'An independent Scotland would face £200m of immediate start-up costs, it has been claimed.
Prof Patrick Dunleavy gave the figure in a report commissioned by The Sunday Post.
The key points from the paper include:

Immediate set up costs of up to £200m to create new versions of existing UK bodies

The total would increase if UK ministers take a 'hostile stance' in post-Yes negotiations

The costs could be offset due to Scotland having a 'smaller government machine', spending less on areas such as defence

The initial expenditure should be seen as an investment which will save on future running costs

The long-run viability of an independent Scotland is "generally high"'- BBC

Obviously the YES side are very happy about this report and Salmond is calling on an immediate apology and retraction of the 2.7 billion figure from the Treasury. Who lets face it have been caught red handed severally exaggerating the figures.

And the NO camp? Well they are responding as if they are just pretending it hasn't happened-

"These eye watering figures cannot be dismissed as inconsequential by Alex Salmond.
People will find it difficult to understand why the nationalists want to spend billions of pounds on offices, quangos and administration rather than schools, hospitals and colleges."


Um what billions? Its only in millions- a bargain for a better prospective future. And its not Salmond who is dismissing the figures- its the Professor on whose report the Treasury based their fictional 2.7 billion figure on!

90 days still to go and the NO side have already started blaming each other-

'LABOUR'S plan for more powers for Holyrood, which was supposed to lead to a cross-party deal on greater devolution in the event of a No vote, has been dismissed as "incoherent, unworkable and confused" by the chairman of the Scottish Conservatives.
Just days after the three No party leaders staged a public show of unity over more powers, Richard Keen QC attacked Labour's proposals as a failed and "horrible compromise" between the party's warring MSPs and MPs.
He also accused Labour of contributing to the "rise of the Nationalists in the West of Scotland" by becoming "thoroughly complacent" and taking voters for granted.'- Herald

The NO camp continue to pull in opposite directions-

'Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser (Scottish Conservatives' spokesman on enterprise, energy and tourism and a former deputy leader of the party) is expected to call for a federal UK in a speech at Glasgow University.
Mr Fraser will say that a federal option could create "common ground" between supporters and opponents of Scottish independence.'
Mr Fraser's comments go further than his party's devolution proposals, which would give the Scottish Parliament additional responsibility over VAT, income tax and welfare if voters reject independence in the referendum in September."- BBC

I'm sure Scottish Tory party leader Ruth Davidson must be delighted at him saying this just a week after she launched their official devolution ideas!

Would a federal UK include a parliament for England to go along with the legislatures in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland? It seems to me like it would have to. That might go some way towards helping the Conservatives win back support from their base, but I wonder what the national Labour and Lib Dem organizations would make of the idea.

Yes it would mean England would have its own separate Parliament- possibly even more than one with the English regions each having their own.

It will find favour with the libdems as they have advocated federalism since the party began.

Its his own party and Labour who are most opposed to federalism.
And his choice to make such an announcement right after the NO campaign have been trying to present a united front on further devolution powers will not have gone down well.

Within a fortnight of that united front we have had Tories slagging off the Labour devo plans as a 'horrible compromise' and that it is 'incoherent, unworkable and confused,' and now a completely different alternative federal plan out of nowhere.
And the Tories we are meant to believe will give us more devo than anyone else if we vote no, a party that opposed devolution in the first place, and whose current Scottish leader got elected on a campaign call regarding devolution of "a line in the sand, this far no further.'

Its kind of surreal.

Interesting study results today on the BBC Scotland site showing that Scots moving to England is at a ten year low, whilst English folk moving to Scotland is up 10% since 2011.

Heading for the promised land!

Good point about Conservatives being opposed to federalism. I don't know why that slipped my mind. There is a campaign for an English parliament though, is there not? Do they draw mainstream support or are they seen as being on the fringe?

Also, didn't Labour under Tony Blair propose regional assemblies in England only to have them rejected by voters in a referendum? I wonder if increased devolution in the other home countries since that time will have changed people's perspectives.

The traditional party lines are-

Tory opposed to nay alterations really of the union- opposed devolution to Scotland and Wales, but supported it in NI as part of the peace deals.
Labour- opposed to federalism (at least officially) but more keen on devolution- but there is a tension between the party in the devolved regions who want more, and the party at Westminster who are more resistent to transferring more powers.
Lib-Dems- in favour of a federal UK. But hopeless fringe party, with even fewer voters than it had before when it was just a fringe party.

Its hard to tell the mood towards regional power in England- they had the chance to elect US style Mayors not so long ago and noone seemed to want one outside of London.

Figg would probably know more about what the feelings about devolved regions in the north of England might be than me.

no idea. havent lived there for 20 years.

Wait - towns don't have mayors? Is there any form of municipal governments? is it all run centrally? Gawd. If so that's a heavy burden on the central government.

there are towns with mayors and local councils who run everything locally, there are city councils for large cities like Manchester. Mayors are largely ceremonial rather than actual power as far as I know its the council departments that run the show.