John Major was right about the Scottish Parliament

In the final dying days of his Government John Major flew to every corner of our country in one last forlorn and largely forgotten attempt to warn the British people that the Union was in danger.  He knew that the establishment of a Scottish Parliament would open up enormous possibilities for Scottish and English nationalism.  The last Tory Prime Minister's fears look increasingly likely to be realised.

An ICM poll for tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph puts support for Scottish independence at 52% amongst Scots (almost identical to the level suggested by a recent Scotsman survey) and 59% in the rest of the UK.  48% of English voters want independence from the rest of the UK.  SNP leader Alex Salmond has always understood that devolution was a stepping stone to independence and told The Sunday Telegraph:

"The onset of devolution has made people realise that since we have a devolved parliament, it's time to have a real parliament with real powers."

It may still be possible to keep the Union together but not without significant poison entering the political bloodstream.  It certainly makes Gordon Brown's position much more difficult.  Is he the man to persuade the Scottish people of the merits of the Union or will he find himself rejected by the English as Scottish nationalism ignites English nationalism?

Related link: Christine Constable on 'City Regions, the West Lothian Question and the future of England'

Comments

[Richard Allen]

In many ways John Major was completely useless and he carries much of the blame for the demise of the conservative party. On this issue however he had great foresight.

[Mark]

He did have great foresight, but the most important thing for English people to remember is....England needs scotland for absolutley nothing!

[k young]

This is excellent news for England, perhaps we can leave the EU now? Of course New Labour always wanted autonomy for Scotland and Wales within the EU and England wiped off the map altogether. Hopefully we can now wipe anti English New Labour off the map.

[Tory Loyalist]

Yes he was right on this.

However I doubt that Major, who in almost every other respect (including his choise of Edwina Currie as bedmate) was utterly appalling, would have the courage to say the same now.

Still its fun to confront these people with their past utterances.

[tapestry]

If Major wanted the Kingdon United, he shouldn't have signed the Maastricht Treaty Of European Union. All euro-traitors put in time covering their tracks.

[Richard ROBINSON]

John Major was wrong about the Scottish Parliament.

Conservative policy towards Scottish devolution has been fundamentally flawed since the mid-1970s. Opposition to the 1978 Scotland Act, failure to deliver on the promise of a Speaker's Conference on devloltion in 1979, a refusal to engage with the Scottish Convention in 1989 and opposition to devolution from 1997 have led to the neutering of the Scottish Conservative Party.

Opposition to devolution is, too, fundamentally at odds with an important Conservative principal: that political decisions should, where possible, be taken as closely as possible to those they affect. Ironically, it was John major who enshrined this principal of subsidiarity in the preamble to the Maastricht Treaty.

The idea that Home Rule for Scotland will lead to the break-up of the United Kingdom is a variance with the history of the UK and with political experience elsewhere in Europe. The Irish civil war and the birth of the Irish Free State can be seen as the result of Britain’s failure in 1886 and 1893 to deliver Home Rule. In Spain, the relationship of Catalunya to the Spanish State is closest to that of Scotland and the UK and in that case recent constitutional reform has increased the autonomy of the Generalitat.

If, as Conservatives, we believe in the unity of the United Kingdom, we should not be afraid to make that case in Scotland, if necessary in a referendum. More than that, as a Party, we should offer the Scots greater independence not less, including much wider powers to vary taxes and spending. This would free Scottish Conservatives to make a case north of the border for a low-tax economy and they could point, with justification, to the experience of the Irish economy.

The answer to the West Lothian Question is not to shy away from devolving power to the lowest possible level in Scotland, but to match that devolution with the genuine return of power to local government in England and Wales.

[Dee]

Is it too early to start partying or do we have to wait until they sign on the dotted line?
Be warned - Any deal done between Scotland and the British government will have to be considered illegal and void. Scotland CANNOT negotiate independence except with an English Parliament, especially when the people they will be negotiating with in a British Parliament, will be Scottish.
Unless of course, England's MPs are stupid enough not to realise that they would be lighting the touch paper of future conflict.
But then, they have been pretty stupid so far, haven't they?

Independence is on its way - hip, hip, hooray!!!! Wales next.

[Henry]

The Conservatives can't see the wood for the trees. Save your typing fingers, they'll still be blubbing and flailing around, begging for Scottish votes when the UK no longer exists.

[Dee]

Even so, its a rare thing to get a Tory who posts about these issues. The McBoss must be furious he can't just yank his chain and rein him in.
Pity they don't go the full way though, and allow us an "English Conservative Party." Now that would put the others on the back foot, wouldn't it?

[Ben Redsell]

I find the parallel with Catalunya interesting and possibly rather prescient. My brother lives in Catalunya with his partner (as a leftie he won't marry, very embarassing) and my two neices. He is now very seriously concerned about their education, because Catalunya has insisted that it's schools will teach in Catalan rather than Spanish. Whilst I have nothing against teaching Catalan, I find the idea of teaching Spanish AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE in a region of Spain rather disturbing. I would be equally concerned if Scotland decided to teach English as a Foreign Language because all the children learnt all their lessons in Gaelic.

Ultimately there is no reason for the United Kingdom to break up simply because of some rampant nationalism. But there probably is now a need for a more federal constitution to enshrine the Union, and the creation of a English Parliament might well be something that should be supported. I'm told Theresa Gorman once supported that, but whether that's a good thing or not I'm not sure.

[Dee]

That's the trouble with the Conservatives - they're not sure about anything except windmills, these days. Not to worry, we've managed witout them so far. The discussion started without you and it will be concluded without you if needs be.

[James Matthews]

Richard "the answer to the West Lothian Question is ........ to match that devolution with a genuine return of power to local government in England and Wales". This is poppycock. The WLQ is about national, not local, forums. To match it there would need to be English and Welsh parliaments with powers equivalent to those of Holyrood. The "local" solution is no more valid than Labour's discredited regional assemblies, Just another device for short-changing the English (and Welsh).

[CDM]

For me, the Union comes before the Conservative Party. I'd rather see our country with a Labour government than a rump UK with a Tory government.

Better red than broken.

[Editor]

Well said, CDM.

[Kevin]

I agree with Richard Robinson's point at 22:51.

The strength and unity of the United Kingdom has, above all else, always been the raison d'etre of the Conservative party.

Given the Scottish peoples' overwhelming desire for more autonomy over domestic matters, the Thatcher and Major governments should have supported some form of devolution as the best way to keep the union together. Their failure to do so has destroyed the Conservative party in Scotland.

An independent Scotland would be a disaster for Scotland, and the loss of the United Kingdom would also severely weaken England, particularly in the context of defence and foreign policy matters. The idea of an English parliament is ridiculous and the West Lothian Question is actually only of serious concern to political geeks.

We need to make the case to the electorate in both Scotland and England that it is in the interest of both countries for a Scottish parliament to continue to operate successfully within the strong overall framework of the United Kingdom. If that means working with Labour on this issue against the SNP, then so be it.

[Charles Heslop]

An independent Scotland will soon evolve into a tired third world state with an ageing population dependent on benefit at the end of the European Cul De Sac. Only this time the English will have no obligation to bail them out. What a legacy Blair will have left us. With the Union Britain was great. All the countries that make up the United Kingdom benefitted. Blair must curse the day that he granted the Scots a referendum on having their own Parliament and that was before he even went into Iraq. What a legacy to be remembered for!!!. He certainly will have a place in the History Books!!!. Of course, Brown will probably never become Prime Minister as he represents a Scottish seat. That though is a short term advantage to the what the dire consequences will be if Scotland decides to leave the Union. I do hope that David Cameron will take this opportunity to speak for all the people of the United Kingdom and not bow to what will certainly be short term electoral gain.

[Dee]

Telegraph today - 68% want an English Parliament and 45% want complete independence.

The numbers are rising monthly. How long can the main parties go on ignoring it? You can't beat us down.

[Alexander Drake]

Who gets the Falklands and Bermuda, Dee? Or is it rocks scissors paper? : )

It would be strange to think that the Union Jack would live on in the flags of my country, but not in the UK itself.

[Alexander Drake]

Presumably this would also mean Scotland would have a Governor-General like other Realms, that fulfilled the constitutional duties of the Crown, and would be treated abroad as one, like ours in Australia. Who would it be?

[Chazza]

Who gets the Falklands and Bermuda, Dee?
there will still be a commonwealth alexander.although I think it is time to put that one to bed too. 500 million to pakistan is it worth it?

[Steven]

To clarify a few points.

It may be Scotlands (or/and Wales) destiny to be an "Independent" little slave state of the EU...it is NOT Englands!

The Scottish contribution to the British military although of the highest order, is negligible, with a population of 50 plus milion England dont need to rely on a nation of 4.5 million for military personnel.

An "Independent" Scotland would not be able to afford the upkeep of any "dependency" or "Nuclear deterrant", England could and will with no problem, in fact England will be quids in when rid of scotland and out of the EU.

England predtaes the now null and void "Union" by at least SEVEN centuries, to all English "Unionists" out there who say the "Union" comes first....what?....even if that means the eradication of England?.

England must get an English parliament by default if rid of Scotland, it wont cost ANY money for an English Parliament as we already have the building, the mother of ALL Parliaments, Westminster.

Scotland wont be splitting from, as Bliar and Broon often say, "The rest of the UK", Scotland is PART of the so called "UK", when scotland is "independent" then there is NO "UK", Bliar and Broon just cant bring themselves to use the "E" word....Scotland seperating from ENGLAND etc.

Labour are only worried because they know they will be out on their ear without Scottish votes keeping them in power, and the countless "British" MPs with Scottish seats who rule England (and only England!) will be out on their ear too!.....whats that Gordon?dont vote "independene" scotland!...i canny be PM then!.

[Dee]

Alexander, they are not possessions to be passed around or claimed like a parcel.
This discussion should already be underway in preparation for independence.

You can't surely believe that Scotland is even considering the best interests of anywhere other than Scotland, can you?

Do not pose your question to me. I do not have my own national Parliament to question. Ask the Scottish Parliament or the Scots in charge of England. For the moment, they are the ones pulling the strings.

[Cllr Graham Smith]

And I thought Tony Blair's legacy was to be incompetence.

Now it sadly looks increasingly likely his legacy will be fracturing the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland...

[Cllr Graham Smith]

Is this what Tony Blair's really thinking?

[TomTom]

Once Michael Forsyth and John Major returned The Stone of Scone to Scotland the Union was finished..............now to learn that Westminster Abbey received a mere two-days notice from the Conservative Govt in 1996 to remove it from The Coronation Chair.............after that piece of symbolism reversing Edward I in 1297, there seems little point in retaining Scotland at all - like his destruction of the Universities and Polytechnics, Major set in train the unravelling of the United Kingdom

[Ed Abrams]

i've said before on this forum that the old style of politics is dead, people now have to decide politics of national identity, get off the the fence and support England and the call for self-determination.
I am an English Democrat - www.engdem.org and we are the new, growing force of English politics, a party that's set up with unity at it's heart. We have a long way to go but it is clear that the old Big Three is going, time to take sides and join a party that has England's interests at it's heart.

Demand JUSTICE FOR ENGLAND.com

[CONNELL]

Legislative devolution must be repealed and replaced by a policy of equal representation (equal and common powers procedure and practice for all 646 MP's). Equal representation is the instinctive and historical Conservative policy on the Union. It is the only policy that can secure the Union.

[Tory Loyalist]

I would be equally concerned if Scotland decided to teach English as a Foreign Language because all the children learnt all their lessons in Gaelic.
_________________________________________________________

That of course would be ludicrous, because throughout thatpart of Scotland's history which is in any way relevant to our present situation, the language of the Lowlands and the cities, and therefore of government, has been Scots, ie Scots-English.

However, the fact that it would be ludicrous dos not mean that it can't happen, given that the overwhelming character of Scottish politics is now ultra-PC (exactly the reverse of the character of most of the inhabitants)

The Conservative Pary is Unionist or it is nothing, and we should fight at all costs to keep the Union. We were foolish indeed to turn our backs on the "Orange" vote which guranteed our party an important role in Scotland.

[aristeides]

"Who gets the Falklands and Bermuda, Dee? Or is it rocks scissors paper? : )"

Well, Falklands to Scotland as they are good at isles that are cold and windswept with lots of sheep. We'll take Bermuda! I guess Wales can have the Rock (Gib.), and Northern Ireland and the Manx can split the scissors and paper.

The Argies will probably take another pop at the Falklands though. Would Salmond be able to save them? There's a plot for a novel in this somewhere.

[wasp]

I find the idea of the Conservative party being Unionist to be utterly fatuous.

The Conservatives have been almost entirely wiped out in Scotland. What we are actually talking about is largely English people saying they want Scotland to stay attached.

Sorry but it doesn't work like that. Self determination is as fundamental a principle in Scotland as it is in Hungary or Latvia.

The Union has been excellent for both nations, but Scotland entered the Union voluntarily, and must have the right to withdraw if it is in the best interests of the Scottish nation.

Most importantly this is a question for the Scots to decide on themselves, and as such has very little to do with the Conservative party.

[Ted]

Connell - turning the clock back is difficult without a groundswell of public support. There seems no real support for this in either Scotland or Wales.

It saddens me that citizens of one of the greatest nations in history can so easily consider its destruction in responses to polls like this. I suppose the decades of negativity in education & the media and political game play must bear much of the blame.
I'm pessismistic about the future because the ill thought through Labour constitutional settlement has been so quickly exposed.

But Conservatives must take the blame as well - we have signally failed to be representative of Scots needs and wants as a party in Scotland and have left opposition to Labour incomptence to the nationalists. We need a strong Scots voice in a British Party - we need to really support and give campaigning strength to our Scots orginasation, cut it lose from the national Party to have its own political agenda.

I would go so far as to ask our supporters in seats we have no chance of winning to vote Labour to keep the nats out. In 2007 the Union is more important than a few votes.

[CONNELL]

Ted refers to "public support" in regard to the repeal of legislative devolution.
All constituencies in Scotland returned MP's to sit in the United Kingdom Parliament in 1997, 2001 and 2005. The electors placed their authority in Westminster. No Abstentionist MP's were elected from Scotland at any of these general elections. If electors in constituencies in Scotland did not want to be part of the Union they would not keep sending their MP to sit in the UK Parliament to exercise their authority. The separatists in Labour and the SNP know this and that is why they do not stand on an abstentionist ticket.

[Tory Loyalist]

I find the idea of the Conservative party being Unionist to be utterly fatuous.
______________________________________________________

It is your comment that is utterly fatuous. The Conservative Party became the Unionist Party when the Union was first threatened by the Liberal in the nineteenth century and it has remained so ever since.

The Scots Parliament may have agreed the union voluntarily, but the union is for all time. In is no more legally dissoluble than the union between Yorkshire and Lancashire.

We Tories want noting to do with anti-British secessionists.

[Simon Freeman]

My personal view is 'Stuff the Scots'. Their ungrateful conntry is full of the socialists that keep this scummy government in power.

So let then go and good riddance.

[TomTom]

In is no more legally dissoluble than the union between Yorkshire and Lancashire.

as evidenced in the Battle of Towton, the bloodiest battle on English soil

On the other hand if Scotland sails into the sunset with the United Kingdom all those treaties signed by the UK Govt would be up for negotiation viz Maastricht, Treaty of Rome.............or we could simply veto Scotland joining

[Ed Abrams]

'The Scots Parliament may have agreed the union voluntarily, but the union is for all time'

God how out of touch you blues really are, time to face the facts and leave the past behind. The union is dying, it has done nothing for England in 300 years, we have been used and abused and NOW is the time for England and her people to stand up and be counted.

The one question that most on here fail to address is Why can't England have the same rights as Scotland and Wales, why is it so wrong to call for an English Parliament, representing the people of England. If you take the Cons view then England's people will be second class citizens within the union, why should we settle for this.

[CDM]

The idea that artificial constructs such as nations can have "rights" is patently absurd, and one that the Conservative Party should avoid like the plague.

[EL Marberry]

Too many Conservatives are the mirror image of the SNP - inventing grievances to blame the Scots/English for.

The Conservtaive Party lost the 2005 election. We have to get used to that. It's wasn't a Scottish conspiracy, we lost massively in seats in England too (we can argue about electoral reform if you wish, but that's a different issue).

Discussions such as this one - led by that ridiculous article at the top of the page (one might as well say 'Churchill was right about the Indian Empire' and maybe Tim does belive that) - show just how much further the change in the Conservative Party has to go.

As a matter of fact, the SNP are a long, long way from securing a Scottish divorce. Even their best polls show them no where near a majority in the Scottish parliament.

[Denis Cooper]

As an Englishman, I'm free to say that once again there's a load of tripe on here from English village idiots whose knowledge of history extends no further back than 1997 and whose vision of the future only goes as far as the establishment of an English Parliament. Which unlike the Westminster Parliament would not be full of people elected by the English, who disregard the interests of the English, and unlike the Scottish Parliament it would not be full of what the Scots call "numpties", elected by the Scots, who similarly disregard the interests of the Scots. Or so we are led to believe.

[Jonathan Mackie]

It's time for an referendum to be held in Scotland to decide this issue once and for all.

Sadly I suspect that independence would be carried.

To those thinking Scotland would be some poverty stricken northern outpost, you need to revise your views. Scotland has 25% of Europe's wind and wave power capability. It will be selling energy across Europe and will become the Saudi Arabia of the 21st century. It will become a very relatively rich country which will enable its left wing policies to be implemented.

[Denis Cooper]

And as a Briton, I'm also free to say that some of the agitation for dissolution of the Anglo-Scottish Union has nothing to do with the long term interests of either the English or the Scots, but is being orchestrated on behalf of the European Union, and that far from being "right" Major was and is a traitor.

[Martin Cole]

Labour has a Scots born PM with his two most likely successors even more blatantly Scots. The Lib/Dems also are led by a Scot, both now and previously.
As foressen and forecast on my blog Teetering Tories, the Conservative Party's problem in this area is their leader's Scottishness.

He might have succeeded in concealing his true feelings of nationality as Blair managed for years but for the fact that he has his already declared refusal to change the financial arrangements which unfairly benefit Scotland over England. I quote from the BBC's own transcript of the interview with Andrew Marr on the "BBC Sunday AM" programme of 25th June this year:

"Andrew Marr...Are the Scots getting too much public money at the moment, proportionately?

DAVID CAMERON: I don't have any plans to change the arrangements. Obviously we're in opposition, we have the opportunity to look at these things and we should do so. But I don't have any plans to make changes. And we should look at funding on the basis of need. And I think that's the right way, right way round. But I want, you know, I am a passionate Unionist, I think that Scotland brings a huge amount to the United Kingdom. The Scottish people bring a huge amount to the United Kingdom and I don't want, and I'm a Cameron, there is quite a lot of Scottish blood flowing through these veins."

In passing, did anybody else notice Marr rolling his eyes in horror this morning at the end of the programme when he had asked his three Scottish guests to comment on the ICM poll in the Sunday Telegraph, and contemplated that for once he might have to have some English guests on his programme next week? And this is supposed to be the BritishBC?

No wonder the majority of English have had enough, but what part can Cameron's party now play?

[Tory Loyalist]

Denis Cooper is of course spot-on in his comment on the English nationalists.

An "English" Parliament would be as much - if not more - packed full of traitors, placemen and Eurofanatics as is the present "Imperial" Parliament.

Sadly one or two of the worst are to be found within our own party.

[Alan T]

I don't see the poll cited in the article above as anything to get excited about. Support for independence has been that high in Scotland in the past two decades and has subsquently waned. You only need look to Quebec to see how hard it is to actually secure seccession with only around 50% support.

Simon Freeman. 'Stuff the Scots'? How insulting and narrow minded is that? Proper arguments please, people.

Dee. Scotland can't legally negotiate independence? Not according to the majority of international legal opinion, precedent and common sense.

Kevin. Indpendence: a disaster for Scotland? Based on what? Our massive reserve of natural resources and energy producing potential? Our history of invention and ingenuity currently stifled but waiting for the right set of policies to reignite it? This comment is for you too Charles. To say Scotland would be a 3rd world country is 'nonsense on stilts' to borrow a phrase and you'd be hard pushed to find any politician or economist, unionist or nationalist, who 'actually' believes that Scotland would be anything other than at least as susccessful as it is now and probably more so.

Tim, at al, can you tell me what it is about the Union that is actually so precious to you or is it just mere sentimentality trumping reason as it appears? In this discussion as in others the positive case for the Union seems to have amounted to 'cuz we're Tories and the Union comes first'. Why does it, though?

[wasp]

Modern Conservatism and dogmatic unionism are not compatible.

Conservatism holds the self defined nation state are the cornerstone of the world order. Hence conservatives have a natural opposition to institutions such as the EU.

Yet we are expected to believe that a self-defined nation state is not appropriate in Scotland.

This 'some transnational unions are good and other's are the sputum of satan' stuff is heavy on tradition and light on principle.

I don't particularly want a division - although having 2 passports would be fun - and I don't think its going to happen, but if the Scots want independence they should be allowed it.

[John Irvine]

"Conservatism holds the self defined nation state are the cornerstone of the world order."

Who says?

In Burke's day the most prominent "self-defined nation state" was the French Republic.

I don't think he'd have agreed with you.

[Denis Cooper]

There's another idiot, commenting on the Sunday Telegraph leader under the foolish nom-de-plume "Richard the Lionheart".

If he knew anything he would know that Richard the Lionheart was more French than English; he didn't even speak English; he spent about six months of his reign in England; he didn't give a damn about England or the English, except for the royal title and as a source of money and men to be slaughtered in his wars; he bankrupted England (his ransom alone was twice the annual royal revenues, and apparently that was raised by confiscating a quarter of private property in England); he left England to be badly governed by his brother; finally he died leaving England in chaos, and wasn't even buried in England.

If the English now are blind enough to give hero status to someone who didn't give a tinker's cuss about their ancestors, maybe they deserve whatever they get.

In particular "Richard the Lionheart" has swallowed the fallacy that dissolution of the Anglo-Scottish Union would mean that England had left the EU:

"England would be out of the EU as it was the UK that signed up, not England."

I don't think so. The default position would be that the treaties would simply be amended so that Scotland and the residual UK became successor member states to the UK. But probably at a price, like setting a date to join the euro.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

"The Union has been excellent for both nations, but Scotland entered the Union voluntarily, and must have the right to withdraw if it is in the best interests of the Scottish nation".

And if it is in the best interests of England we should withdraw. With all due respects to the bulk of Scots voters, the Scots are over represented in Parliament and therefore the last election was skewered toward Labour and, will continue to be against returning a Right or Right of centre party (not that the present Leader of the Tories is connected with the latter).
It is mainly England that continues to pay the price of being in the EU; England is the destination for the great bulk of immigration. I am sorry to have to say this, but England on its own would have a greater chance of acceeding to the wishes of the majority of English voters and also of leaving the clutches of the EU. The Scots can then continue to enjoy the benefits of wealth creating socialism.
Although, to be fair to them (especially to the ladies), I am given to understand that the majority of Scots are now great fans of Cameron and will now be voting in overwhelming numbers for the Conservative Party (if you believe that you will believe anything)

[malcolm]

I hope Cameron will campaign as hard for the retention of the Union as John Major did. John Major government made many mistakes, his support for the Union wasn't one of them.
Utterly bizarre comment from Tomtom (above) about the Stone Of Destiny.This was simply gesture politics at it's very worst. It should not have been permitted but was soon forgotten in England and Scotland and completely failed to save the Conservative vote in 1997.

[Denis Cooper]

Dontmakemelaugh @ 17:28 - "... the Scots are over represented in Parliament"

Not so, not any longer. The Welsh are over-represented, but not the Scots.

[CONNELL]

The consensus on legislative devolution must be broken just as the economic consensus between 1945 and 1979 was broken.
Repeal is the only policy for those who believe in a United Kingdom governed exclusively by our British parliament.
The question all Conservatives must ask is who in the Scottish Conservatives in September 1997 decided to abandon centuries of opposition to legislative devolution in order to surrender to it.

[Opinicus]

@Denis Cooper
Are you Scots? You yearn for Britain to leave the EU more than almost anyone on this blog (apart from me) but you are repeatedly, completely deaf to the idea that the sort of cardinal political change required to achieve English independence from Scotland will lay the ground for the much greater change needed to withdraw from the EU. I can only assume that that is because if it happens you would be left in the wrong half.

The polling figures keep on growing despite a conspiracy of the political classes to say nothing about the issue. UKIP must reinvent itself as an Independence party and take up the running. Nature and politics abhor a vacuum. This is an issue that would reverse the falling turnout and get people to the polling stations.

Lets have it as one of the 100 policies, Ed. and put it to the vote here at least.

[David McEwan Hill]

So very sad. I have rarely read so much utter rubbish in such a short space of time.
1. The United Nations Charter to which UK is an original signtory guarantees the inalienable right of self-determination. If the Scots wish to be independent they don't have to negotiate - they merely have to vote for it. Negotiation is only a feature of pre-Independence division of assets and debts.
2. In a majority of the last forty years scotland has produced a budget surplus while the UK as a whole over the same period produced budget deficits every year.
3. The Scots have no desire whatsover to be unfriendly to the English. Some of the anti-Scottish bile in these postings if widely distributed will certainly speed up Scotland's movement to Independence.
I will be widely distributing these.
4. How would most of your ranting respondents feel if England was governed from Paris? Do those opposed to UK being part of EU not recognise that this is a bit similar to Scotland being a part of UK.
5 Withiut Scottish Oil revenues the UK economy would be a "basket case". So said Denis Healy when he was Chancellor. The UK econpomy now is a huge con -sustained by huge levels of personal debt and unsustainable property prices. Let's hope it all collapses before the grim self-serving Gordon Brown (who has knowingly produced this political con) gets his hands on the power.
6 Don't be decieved into thinking Bropwn is popular in Scotland. The constituency in which he lives had a huge Labour majority - till last year when Labour got absolutely horsed at a by-election in it. Brown now has a LibDem MP and an SNP councillor in the ward in which he lives. In an adjacent ward to his constiuency last month SNP took a "safe" Labour seat with swing of about35%.
7 Most respondents on this site appear to be living in some sort of political cloud-cuckoo land imagining there is something great about Britain. In fact it is falling further and further behind most of the developed countries of Europe in almost every economic indicator and in then provision of national services and standars of living.
The four richest countries in Europe judged by standards of living and standards of service provision are Ireland, Iceland, Norway and Denmark. UK comes in 18th. Yes 18th! Ireland - yes Ireland- is the second richest society now in the world,second only to the US in terms of personal worth. Aren't they glad they got shot of the dead hand of England who continued to export the healthy potatoes out of Irenad as the Irish starved in their homes and their fields during the great famine.
8 The most striking aspect of this series of bizarre postings is the blind arrogance of most contribuors who know nothing of the reat of the world,live in some kind of Victorian fantasy land and imaginge the Scpots and the Welsh etc etc are freeloading on England. What is actually the case is that inordinate amounts of the money made by everybody in the rest of these islands makes its way to those who live on the South East and London who continually plunder the national resources and pay themselves too much as they are at it. The recent history of the Uk is the history of the South East of England playing with money they didn't work for and feasting on the proceeds of the toil of everbody else and the poor unfotunates in th "colonies" (the sons and daughters of whom are coming here to get some of their grandparents wages).
I could go on all night.
I am proud of the massive contribution that little Scotland has made to the world which hugely surpasses that made by UK (or England, which most of your contributors think is the same thing).
The sooner we're out the better - and the better for England too as it would then have to make a real job of runnig an economy without relying on revenues from Spotland's oil and vast reserves of surplus energy.

[Dave J]

There are extremists on both ends in this thread who are missing the real point. The real point has nothing to do with money (although money comes into it as a consequence) but with legitimacy, accountability, self-goverment and basic fairness. As an American who's a longstanding observer of, and occasional participant in, British politics (I interned at CCO in 1996 as John Major's government was falling apart), I find myself repeatedly astounded at this whole talking-past-eachother non-debate debate. People who opposed devolution in 1997 at least generally did so in a more or less consistent and credible way. But it seems to me that there is truly no good faith logical argument to be made in favor of the current post-1997 status quo: unequal devolution WILL cause the Union to break up, full stop. The real alternatives are a federal UK, or no more UK. Anyone who thinks otherwise is, no offense and to be blunt, deluding themselves.

"The question all Conservatives must ask is who in the Scottish Conservatives in September 1997 decided to abandon centuries of opposition to legislative devolution in order to surrender to it."

No, Connell, the time to ask such questions as that is long since past. A future government of whatever color could no more repeal the 1997 Scotland Act than they could repeal the Reform Act of 1832. It's done. Move on and engage the world as it is rather than as you wish it could have been. Unequal devolution awoke English nationalism because Scottish MP's voting on how to govern England when they have no mandate to address the vary same questions for their own constituents is, to draw upon my own American political lexicon derived from still-more ancient English grievances, taxation without representation.

I truly can't begin to understand why a parliament for each of the comoponent nations of the UK is such a "ridiculous" idea as some of its opponents state. Now, I appreciate the idea that more politicians and so forth costs money, etc., argument, which is why the most elegant solution I've heard of would be dual-mandate MPs: get rid of the MSP's and AM's, and have the Westminster MP's elected for England sit as the English Parliament, the ones elected in Wales sit in Cardiff at specified times as the Welsh Parliament, and so on in Edinburgh and Belfast. The party compositions in each body and the federal parliament would, of course, be different: for example, an English Tory MP could be a minister in the English government and a member of the opposition in the federal British/UK parliament.

"Withiut Scottish Oil revenues the UK economy would be a "basket case". So said Denis Healy when he was Chancellor."

He also notoriously said "crisis? What crisis?" Quoting Denis Healy as an authority on anything pretty much destroys your credibility right off. The idea that Scottish oil (a sizeable percentage of which would be in English waters had the maritime boundary not been altered in the 70's) sustains the UK economy is laughable: the British economy is overwhelmingly service-oriented, not dependant on natural resources. The City of London generates more economic activity on its own than Scotland as a whole.

[Tory Loyalist]

A stream of arrogant claptrap from David McEwan Hill, who is clearly no Conservative.

Scotland has no right of self-determination because it merely forms a part of a greater whole.

Without England Scotland would have remained mired in a slough of barbarism, dirt and cruelty. Not my opinion. That was the view of the leading Scots progressives who voted for the Act of Union nearly 300 years ago.

When BRITAIN's oil runs out an independent Scotland will be left up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

[Opinicus]

@David McEwan Hill
I really don't know why you are so heated. You seem to get most annoyed with the Englishmen who agree with you. You are not wrong because the English want Scotland to have independence, you know. You might be wrong about how successful the Scots and English economies will be post independence but sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
The UK is a merger of four nations, if one nation wants out then it has an inalienable right to go after a referendum. The door is open. Seize your courage, next May. Vote SNP.
Go.
Please.

[Not a Tory Boy]

Its amusing that the Tories think they have any say over Scotland having a referendum for Independence, when Scotland does not vote for the Tories and nor are they likely to in the next ten thousand years.

What will it take for you Unionist dinosaurs to take the hint? A double decker bus with Sod Off pasted across it, smashing into Camerons push bike?

[Dave J]

Ah yes, Not a Tory Boy. Talk of how wonderful things will be for an independent Scotland remind me of the hilarious "Quebecois Independence Activity Book" I ran across in the bookshop at McGill when I was last in Montreal. One of the parody "ads" inside is an homage to the Charles Atlas bodybuilding ads from the 1950's: the 98-pound weakling labeled "Quebec" gets sand kicked in his face by muscular "Ottawa" (haha) and then the Charles Atlas figure--actually Bloc Quebecois founder Lucien Bouchard--shows up and tells him:

"Do you suffer from delusions of national persecution? Well, with my patented National Tension Method (TM), I can make you into an independent country with REAL problems!"

[malcolm]

Your first post is the best on this thread Dave J.It seems impossible for those on this blog to debate this subject without insdulging in huge amounts of rancour or anti English or anti Scottish bile.

[Tory Loyalist]

His post would have been better had he attributed "Crisis what Crisis?" to the person actually supposed to have said it, namely James Callaghan.

They were in fact a distortion of Callaghan's actual words, but they have never been attributed to Healey.

Returning to the corrupt old Scots parliament I am reminded of its infamous epitaph: "There's the end of an auld sang"

The sooner the "new sang" is put out of its misery the better.

[Denis Cooper]

Jonathan @ 22:08 -
"@Denis Cooper
Are you Scots? You yearn for Britain to leave the EU more than almost anyone on this blog (apart from me) but you are repeatedly, completely deaf to the idea that the sort of cardinal political change required to achieve English independence from Scotland will lay the ground for the much greater change needed to withdraw from the EU. I can only assume that that is because if it happens you would be left in the wrong half."

No, as I said yesterday @ 14:34 - "As an Englishman, I'm free to say that once again there's a load of tripe on here from English village idiots..."

Which there was. For example, dee @ November 25th 22:52 -

"Independence is on its way - hip, hip, hooray!!!! Wales next."

Thanks. So first the English lose control of the northern third of the island, with about half the coastline, and have a porous land border with a potentially hostile republic. (If you don't think it would be a potentially hostile republic, read some of the comments on the Scotsman website.) Then the English lose control of a chunk on the west side of the island, another stretch of coastline, and an even longer porous land border.

It's about time these people started to think beyond their short term and easily resolved gripes about delays in the latest drugs being made available in England, to the disastrously weakened strategic position their idiocy would bequeath to their descendants. Why do they suppose the English political leadership wanted the Union of the Parliaments, and in fact insisted on the "incorporating" Union of Parliaments rather than a weaker form of Union, in the first place?

There is absolutely no reason to suppose that it would easier to get England alone, or Scotland alone, out of the EU than it would be to get the whole of the UK out of the EU. The suggestion that because the UK is the present party to the treaties Scotland and the residual UK would automatically be outside the EU in the event of Scottish independence is a complete red herring.

Does anybody really think that once it was agreed that Scotland would become an independent country on such and such a date, the EU would sit back and wait for that to happen, and then afterwards open negotiations on whether the two new countries should re-join? Of course not: it would all be sorted out beforehand, the treaties would be amended as necessary, and the amended treaties would come into force at the same time as the split between Scotland and the rest of the UK.

And what would happen if it turned out that Scotland was in the EU, but England was no longer in the EU, or vice versa? Think it through. For a start, either way the border between England and Scotland would be part of the EU's external border, if necessary controlled by Frontex on the EU side.

[Bruce]

It's ironic that Scots support for independence is at a high mark at a time when all three UK political parties are led by Scots: Blair/Brown, Cameron, Campbell.

But on the substantive issue: Suppose your spouse wants a divorce. You may think he/she is crazy to do so. You may think divorce makes a mockery of your "till death do you part" wedding vows (vows in this case made in 1707). You may think your spouse is an ungrateful spendthrift. You certainly intend to argue against it. But in the end, if your spouse is decided on divorce, can the marriage be saved? Shall the spouse be kept in the marriage against her/her will, and if so, why? How?

[Jeremy M-W]

The party has a great opportunity here if it taps into the obvious pro-England feelings.

To not do so opens up an opportunity for another to do so. It would be incompetent to not recognise this possibility and David must take up his English votes for English laws campaign without being put off again.

Otherwise we fall between two stools with nothing to offer this mass of people who want a solution.

[David McEwan Hill]

Somebody has observed I'm no Tory. How percipient. I would rather eat my own scrotum than be thought to be a Tory. I like to think I'm reasonably intelligent. The Tory party is a conspiracy of a small percentage of the population to rule the rest through the expedient of appealing generally to the traits of envy, ambition and intolerance to be found among the timorous middle classes in England. The only intelligent Tories are the ones in charge. The rest are being taken advantage of.We have very little of this deferential middle classs in Scotland which explains why the Scots are more disputative, more ambitious, more energetic and more successful than the English. In fact he Scots vie with the Jews for the title of being the world's most successful people.
On the one hand respondents on thois site are characterising the Scots as ignorant barbarians while in the same breath they're bemoaning the fact that the Scots run England. Has the contradiction been missed. I could sit here all night writng an endless list of the universal achiements of the Scots but I'd probaly be wasting my time introducing the information to some of the arrogant half-wits who feature here.
Scotland will be Independent. It would be a lot better if this was achieved in an atmosphere of mutual respect and not as the result bitterness caused by a deliberate distortion of the economic relationship between England and Scotland which is being promoted by elements of the the English Tory party and other less digestible English right-wing groups.

[Alexander Drake]

In fact [t]he Scots vie with the Jews for the title of being the world's most successful people.

Dream on, sport. What about this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/6174610.stm

I love Scotland David, and you're right, it's a great country - but last time I checked those quality of life surveys that Mercer Consulting does, Sydney came in at no. 8 and Glasgow came in around no. 55. Doesn't sound too "successful" in delivering what matters most to people, to me.

Sounds like Scotland needs a Tory government to fix it : )

[John Irvine]

"Somebody has observed I'm no Tory. How percipient. I would rather eat my own scrotum than be thought to be a Tory."

Nice to know what charming and articulate socialist types we're dealing with north of the border.

"I like to think I'm reasonably intelligent."

You might say that, I couldn't possibly...

[Dee]

Denis, you have had the EU situation explained to you on so many occasions on this forum. Once more for you - though I have no doubt it will fall on deaf, or daft, ears - IF ENGLAND BECOMES INDEPENDENT, OR SCOTLAND FOR THAT MATTER, WE ARE AUTOMATICALLY OUT OF THE EU. WE JOINED AS THE UK. IF ANY COUNTRY IN THE UK BECOMES INDEPENDENT, THE UK NO LONGER EXISTS. THEREFORE, ANOTHER REFERENDUM WOULD HAVE TO BE HELD IN ENGLAND BEFORE WE COULD RE-ENTER THE EU.

Got that, Denis? No, I don't suppose you have. Perhaps it is a little complicated for some, such as UKIP, who I believe are terrified of having no reason to exist. Once we leave the EU, they, as well as the Laddies in Westminster, would not be able to ride the EU gravy train in Brussels. They won't like that.

[Jon White]

David McKewan Hill - I find it strange that I as a Tory, and you who would "rather eat your own scrotum" than be thought of one, are on the same page on this issue.

We both want the millstone of the Scotland removed from the neck of the taxpayers of England. All power to you, Sir. I love Scotland as a country - it is a truly beautiful place with a proud history and great achievements as you say. I just object to the fact that England has to pay to support it, especially when people like you are so ungrateful.

After reading these posts I have become more and more convinced that we should drop the 'Unionist' from our Party name, and join with Alex Salmond in the fight for independence from England. BUT - on the proviso that it is a one way path, NO going back, and no coming to England cap in hand when you find that you can't support your ecomony without English subsidies.

[David McEwan Hill]

What rubbish Dee writes. Should Scotland and England separate both countries inherit the treaty obligations of the original state - that is the legal position as pronounced by the constitutional authority of the EC. Both counties would be in until they negotiate a way out if they wish to (as for instance Greenland did when it decided to leave the EU axis and join the US/Canada one instead).
His comments are typical of many of the ignorant views expressed on this site. If any one wanted to experience at first hand the astonishing depth of the ignorant arrogance of the English (who know very little about any other country and care even less) they will get it here. The havering selection contributing here seem to be unaware of the fact that UK has fallen behind EVERY OTHER DEVELOPED EUROPEAN NATION in provision of virtually everything that defines a modern civilised society. I take no pride in this. But at least I'm aware of it.
It has come to a sorry pass when the great nation that invented the licquorice allsort and Strictly Come Dancing is eclipsed by Iceland, Ireland and Norway. There is no argument of course from any sensible and objective observer that Scotland has contributed more to the great advances of the modern world than any other national group with the possible exception of the Jews.
I hesitate to start a history lesson here but a few instances will indicate my points admirably
In 1912 finally all children in England were required to go to school. A great step forward indeed.
All children went to school in Scotland by Parliment's decree from the sixteenth century. Eight and nine year olds were learning Latin in Scotish parish schools when Robert Burns - a farm labourer's son - went to school.
Scotland was unique in Europe in this respect.
From the sixteenth century all lawyers in Scotland were required to provide FREE legal aid to the poor and had to produce evidence of at least a third of their work in this sphere.
Let me quote the words of Professor Arthur Herman who argues "that Scotland's turbulent
history laid the foundations for 'the Scottish miracle'. Within one hundred years the nation that began the eighteenth century dominated by a harsh Kirk had evolved into Europe's most literate society, producing an idea of modernity that has shaped much of civilisation as we know it." Can I put it more plainly than that. It was even a Scot who founded the Bank of England, because then as now the really clever guys about running things in England were the educated Scots. The barbarians in the UK were the English who spent most of the centuries up to the twentieth fighting wars of expansion and colonialisation. Do you think that the Union Jack is referred to as the "Butchers Apron" in many parts of the world by accident?
As I saud I have no dislke of the English at all. But I do object to reading the sort of Anti-Scottish bile that started at the top of this issue - and we can give as good as we get and better.
I would suggest that some of the ill-informed contributing here should get down to their local municipal libraries (started basically by Scots) and get out Professor Hermans " The Scottish Enlightenment - The Scottish Invention of the Modern World", read it and come back and apologise for their appalling ignorance.
As for my uneaten scrotum my position in tht will never change. The Tory party is a conspiracy against the common good by which a very small section of the clever people who believe they have some right to rule deceive a larger number of the easily persuaded (by appealing to their inate snobbery and ill-informed predjudices) to get them to vote for a system where the well-off get to keep their power and privileges over others.
Historically the Tory Party is nothing in Scotland. It enjoyed a Scottish heyday in the middle part of the 20th century (the era of the "One Nation" Tories) but the Scots basically dislike elitism and the sort of shallow banalities that fuel Toryism. On the vexed question of subsidy this is another area where much of England is misinformed. Scotland every year has a positive balance of revenue over expenditure into the British state (Parliamentary answers). Those who believe otherwise have fallen foul of a sneaky little political trick by which Westminster executives, determined to hang onto Scotland choose to identify those areas of expenditure in Scotland which are per capita higher than Englands (like health and education). They then seek to suggest that the Scottish voter gets preferential funding on a personal level when in fact the disparity is almost entirely due to the challenging nature of provision of essential services over what is largely a rugged and sparsely populated area. You could draw down the same sort of bullshit to an extent by breaking down English regions.
Do any of you ever ask yourself the simple question. "If Scotland is costing England so much why do successive British Goverments hang into Scotland quite so grimly?"
Could it perhaps be the vast reserves of oil (over 50 years left in the Scottish North Sea ands vast Atlantic fields not opened yet).
(And before anybody asks -it is all in Scottish territorial waters as presently internationally defined.)
Could it be that we produce twice as much electicity as we use and export the rest onto the "national" grid.
Could it be that we produce more than SIX times the amount of natural gas we need and the rest goes to England.
Could it be virtually all of UKs f*cking nuclear weapons about 12 miles from my house and only 23 miles from our largest city.
I could go on.
I am a member and office-bearer in the Scottish National Party here in Argyll.
I am proud to say that three of my branch office bearers including the Chairman and the Secretary are English. Many English in Scotland are readily absorbed into our friendly communities and very many are members of the SNP working for Scottish Indpendence.
The friendly dissolution of a union well past it sell-by date is best for all.
I however reserve the right to get stuck into any other obnoxious,ignorant and arrogant posts on this site.
>

[Denis Cooper]

Dee, or Della, so what do you suppose the EU leaders will be doing during the period between

a) A formal decision that Scotland will become an independent sovereign state on such and such a date.

b) That date when separation takes place.

Sitting on their hands, thinking how sad it is that the EU will be losing one of its member states, an eighth of its present population, a much larger fraction of its total GDP, and of course its financial contributions?

I think not. The present UK is a party to the EU treaties, so those treaties would have to be amended to take account of the separation of the UK into two states, and once ratified those amended treaties would come into force on the same day as the separation takes place.

You're simply assuming that the amended EU treaties would not include the residual UK as a party - why? You're assuming that there would have to be a referendum on continued membership - why?

You have no grounds for either of those assumptions. The most likely scenario is the opposite - that both Scotland and the residual UK would remain in the EU as successor member states to the present UK, but possibly on less favourable terms. For example, other member states may insist that both countries must agree to set a latest date by which they will join the euro.

[Dave J]

Denis, the more likely scenario would be successor states being treated as successor states typically are under general principles of public international law, inheriting their predecessors' unmodified obligations.

[Denis Cooper]

I'm sure that would be true for the majority of the numerous international treaties to which the UK is presently a party. However in a minority of cases it could be more complicated than that.

One instance would be the NATO treaty. As the SNP are strongly opposed to NATO membership, the question could then arise whether a) Scotland would inherit unwanted NATO membership and then give due notice of its withdrawal, or b) as the existing party to the treaty, the UK would give that notice on Scotland's behalf, and it would then run during the period leading up to final separation.

However the case of the EU treaties is far more complicated because of the dynamic nature of the project, and the fact that in several respects the UK presently has an exceptional position in an organisation which does not view exceptions as anything more than temporary expedients, brief delays in the overall process of "ever closer union". Since all member states would have to agree to the amended treaties, I would expect the more integrationist states to push hard for those exceptions to be eliminated.

What is certain is that if the UK underwent an orderly split into two states then the default position would be that both successor states remained in the EU.

[johnC]

It will be lovely for Scotland to join Barbados, Belize, Papua New Guinea and the rest as Commonwealth Realms enjoying personal union with the United Kingdom of
England, Wales and Northern Ireland. They can attend Commonwealth Conferences and sit between Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Sierra Leone. If they are lucky they might get a Royal Visit once every ten years and they can issue their own brightly coloured stamps to celebrate.

[Terry]

The latest opinion poll shows 68% of the English wanting an English Parliament.

Will David Cameron continue to deny the English devolution "long after it was shown to be the considered will of the English people"?

[David McEwan Hill]

Denis Cooper's latest remarks typify some of the sillier stuff on this site. Someone asked asked earlier "Who gets Falklands? Who gets Bermuda?"
The answer to that of course is "Who Cares!"
No Scot, for certain and such considerations are part of the psyche of only the English in these isles.
Similarly whether the Queen ever comes to Scotland is not something that exercises most Scots (except the diminishing band of ancient Tories)at all.
Actually an Independent Scotland will sit betweeen Saudi Arabia and Senegal at the UN and keep the company of other insignificant little nonentities like Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, Ireland, Iceland, Finland all of whom are providing for their peoples - and for their senior citizens in particular-services and standards of living that UK people can only dream of.
Fifteen countries - most of them smaller than Scotland - have become Independent members of the UN over the past 12 years.

[John Irvine]

If ungrateful socialists like David McEwan Hill are typical of the idiots we are dealing with north of the border berhaps it is as well if we do leave them to go to hell at leisure.

McEwan Hill's insolent dismissal of his Monarch brands him as a disloyal and spiteful extremist.

Alongside an England relieved of the burden of Scotland, our northern neighbour will look like a pygmy beside a giant.

[Dee]

What's up John Irvine, did the Scot touch a raw nerve with the truth? Pigmy beside a giant? Grow up. When England and Scotland separate, we will still be neighbours and I will wish them and joining the street parties while you'll still be crying into your pillow with the rest of the Unionist Dinosaurs.

As for the royals - Not a whimper have they made while they have seen their English subjects discriminated against in such a way that our NHS patients are told to die cheaply and quietly so the Scottish Chancellor can raid our taxes for his own country. Charles speaks our for the welfare of his plants, for goodness sakes, his PLANTS!! And not a peep has he uttered about the current state of affairs in what is supposed to be the kingdom he will inherit. Too bloody busy brown nosing the muslims to keep himself in a job. As soon as the Queen dies, the royals have to be put out to grass.

[Denis Cooper]

"Denis Cooper's latest remarks typify some of the sillier stuff on this site."

Which? If you mean:

"It will be lovely for Scotland to join Barbados, Belize, Papua New Guinea and the rest as Commonwealth Realms enjoying personal union with the United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland. They can attend Commonwealth Conferences and sit between Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Sierra Leone. If they are lucky they might get a Royal Visit once every ten years and they can issue their own brightly coloured stamps to celebrate."

then they were Posted by: johnC | November 30, 2006 at 16:24 , not me.

[Denis Cooper]

If we did end up with a English republic, hopefully we could find somebody less vicious than "dee", ie Della Petch, to elect as President. Not that it would matter too much, as all the republics which succeeded the UK would be still be in the EU and increasingly controlled by Brussels. Maybe that's what she really wants, and all this business about an English Parliament is just a sham.

[Dee]

LOL Give over, Don. I remember the referendum for the Common Market. I was mere nipper at school. The teacher told all the kids to mark a tick underneath the Yes or No boxes, to indicate which we would vote for if we able to. Of course, everyone voted according to what they heard their parents saying. It was a hot topic at that time and all the parents talked about it. I was only one of two children that ticked underneath the no box. The teacher then gave us a lecture as to why our parents should vote yes.
Looks like those who ticked the yes have grown up to wish they'd ticked no and I wonder too what that teacher thinks about it today.

[Denis Cooper]

In that case, Della, why are you now doing the EU's work for them?

[David McEwan Hill]

There are some people determined to be unpleasant on this topic. If you want to wield the knife in politics it should be either clever or funny.
The sort of juvenile abuse some are handing out here is neither.

[David McEwan Hill]

John Irvine presumes because I have never been taken in by the Tory conspiracy that I must be a socialist. Wherever did he get that idea? Typical of the sort of thinking one gets from persons of limited ablilty to understand anything but the simplest "either or" scenarios. He also describes me as an idiot. On what grounds I wonder.
Again the reaction of someone with a limited grasp of anything other than comfortable assumptions which are unthinkingly held - a huge percentage of the Tory support I imagine.
Fortunately there are some perfectly sensible posts to this site which I am enjoying.

[David McEwan Hill]

Might I recommend the following link to your more thoughtful resppondents. It includes a very compelling piece by the right wing commentator and former Toy candidate Michael Fry

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7990

[David McEwan Hill]

It's all gone quiet. Have I seen everybody off? Another Bannockburn?
One of the more persistent and irritating aspects of this kind of discussion is the number of English people who appear to hold that in 1707 England absorbed Scotland.
I actual fact England and Scotland came together as equal partners into a Union in 1707 which was voluntary.

[Tory Loyalist]

Fortunately there are some perfectly sensible posts to this site which I am enjoying
_______________________________________________________

Mainly your own, it seems.

"Away false northern kern, at home to starve!"

[David McEwan Hill]

Indeed.
As we still produce a food surplus the second is unlikely -though a diet of roast beef, lamb, salmon and rich cheeses is probably a little rich.

[Hereward the wake]

"The idea that artificial constructs such as nations can have "rights" is patently absurd, and one that the Conservative Party should avoid like the plague"

What's a politically correct, loony left, pinko wannabe moron like you doing on a tory forum then?
___________________________________________
RE: Richard the lionheart

"If the English now are blind enough to give hero status to someone who didn't give a tinker's cuss about their ancestors, maybe they deserve whatever they get"

No, we do not deserve what we get. And, we will establish our parliament again. By the way, my nickname is HEREWARD THE WAKE.

___________________________________________

"What rubbish Dee writes. Should Scotland and England separate both countries inherit the treaty obligations of the original state - that is the legal position as pronounced by the constitutional authority of the EC. Both counties would be in until they negotiate a way out if they wish to"

Rubbish!
I do not recognise any treaty established by deceit. ALL the treaties signed by the labour, new labour and THE CONSERVATIVE AND UNIONIST PARTIES (APPARENTLY) ARE ILLEGAL. By the way, what are the eu going to do about it? Come to that, what are the sweaties going to do about it?

"So very sad. I have rarely read so much utter rubbish in such a short space of time.
The United Nations Charter to which UK is an original signtory guarantees the inalienable right of self-determination"

If the Scots wish to be independent they don't have to negotiate - they merely have to vote for it"

REALLY? IN THAT CASE THE ENGLISH SHOULD ALREADY HAVE THEIR PARLIAMENT BACK.
WE ALSO WANT TO BE TOTALLY DEVOID OF FREE-LOADERS.
OF COURSE WE WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR IT YEARS AGO IF THE "THREE MAIN SCUMBAG PARTIES" LOADED TO THE HILT WITH DIRTBAG "EX"-COMMIE JOCKS, PADDIES AND TAFFS HADNT COLLUDED BEHIND CLOSED DOORS TO STOP IT.
AWWWWWWWW, WHATS THE MATTER TOO SCARED TO COME OUT IN THE OPEN?

"The Scots have no desire whatsover to be unfriendly to the English. Some of the anti-Scottish bile in these postings if widely distributed will certainly speed up Scotland's movement to Independence.
I will be widely distributing these"

AHA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! A YELLOW BELLIE. "NO DESIRE TO BE UNFRIENDLY" THE HELL YOU DON'T. GOOD. WHEN WE'RE BOTH INDEPENDENT LETS PARLY.

"I will be widely distributing these"

AHA! HA! HA! Oh well done jimmy. Have a gold star.

"How would most of your ranting respondents feel if England was governed from Paris"

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! BOO! HOO! STOP USING LIES AS JUSTIFICATION YOUR OWN CHILDISH HATEFUL MENTALITY. SCOTLAND IS NOT RULED FROM LONDON IDIOT. OR HAVE YOU BEEN ASLEEP SINCE THE SCOTCH PARLIAMENT WAS BUILT?
THIS IS JUST A RED HERRING THROWN IN TO CONFUSE.

"Do those opposed to UK being part of EU not recognise that this is a bit similar to Scotland being a part of UK"

NO, IT ISNT THE SAME AT ALL! SCOTLAND CONDUCTS 75% OF IT'S OWN POLITICAL BUSINESS NUMBSKULL. ENGLAND ENTERED INTO A UNION WITH SCOTLAND VOLUNTARILY NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY TO THE CONTRARY. THE EU WAS FORCED UPON THE ENGLISH PEOPLE BY SCUMBAG FIFTH COLUMNISTS. OF COURSE IT ISNT THE SAME DOPEY! you know, you should really stop sniffing the whiskey bottle.

"Withiut Scottish Oil revenues the UK economy would be a "basket case".

SCOTCH OIL? IT ISNT ALL IN SCOTCH WATERS. AND WE WILL MOVE THE BORDER THAT NEW LABOUR CHANGED BACK WHEN WE GET IN POWER. BY THE WAY, I HOPE SCOTLAND JOINS THE EU AS "SCOTTISH OIL" WILL BECOME E.U. OIL OVERNIGHT HA! HA!

"Don't be decieved into thinking Bropwn is popular in Scotland."

who gives a rat's arse about that one-eyed tool?

7 Most respondents on this site appear to be living in some sort of political cloud-cuckoo land imagining there is something great about Britain. In fact it is falling further and further behind most of the developed countries of Europe in almost every economic indicator and in then provision of national services and standars of living.
The four richest countries in Europe judged by standards of living and standards of service provision are Ireland, Iceland, Norway and Denmark. UK comes in 18th. Yes 18th! Ireland - yes Ireland- is the second richest society now in the world,second only to the US in terms of personal worth. Aren't they glad they got shot of the dead hand of England who continued to export the healthy potatoes out of Irenad as the Irish starved in their homes and their fields during the great famine"

Oh so you're an "articulate" paddy ah? Do you reside in chicago then?
"Ireland- is the second richest society now in the world,second only to the US in terms of personal worth"

HA! HA! SURE IT IS. THE ONLY REASON THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND HAS ANY PROSPERITY IS BECAUSE OF ALL THE MONEY THE EU HAS THROWN AT IT AND THE EU ONLY DID THAT SO THE PADDIES WOULD VOTE FOR THEIR TREATY YOU MORON. HOW MUCH MONEY ARE THE EU THROWING THEIR WAY NOW? DRIED UP HAS IT? YEAH THATS BECAUSE THE EU IS NOW TRYING THE SAME TRICK WITH THE EASTERN EUROPEAN STATES.
AND,YOU NEED TO PUT UP SOME LINKS TO YOUR *ER-HEM* "RESEARCH"

"The most striking aspect of this series of bizarre postings is the blind arrogance of most contribuors who know nothing of the reat of the world,live in some kind of Victorian fantasy land and imaginge the Scpots and the Welsh etc etc are freeloading on England"

EVER HEARD OF SCOT-FREE OR SCOTCH PURSE? I WONDER WHY THOSE PHRASES ARE COMMONPLACE IN ENGLAND. WHAT DO YOU RECKON JIMMY?
"BLIND ARROGANCE"? WELL, YOU SHOULD KNOW AH?

"What is actually the case is that inordinate amounts of the money made by everybody in the rest of these islands makes its way to those who live on the South East and London who continually plunder the national resources and pay themselves too much as they are at it"

WELL IF THAT'S THE CASE JIMMY, SUPPLY US WITH YOUR EVIDENCE TO PROVE THIS.
HOW DRUNK WERE YOU WNE YOU STARTED THIS POST?

"The recent history of the Uk is the history of the South East of England playing with money they didn't work for and feasting on the proceeds of the toil of everbody else and the poor unfotunates in th "colonies" (the sons and daughters of whom are coming here to get some of their grandparents wages)"

THE SOUTH EAST OF ENGLAND? OH WHERE KING JAMES LIVED YOU MEAN? OR SHOULD I SAY, LIVED OFF OF ENGLISH FOLKS? I WONDER WHY GUY FAWKES TRIED TO BLOW HIM UP? WHAT DO YOU THINK JIMMY? I WONDER WHY GUY FAWKES TOLD KING JAMES THAT HE WANTED TO BLOW HIM AND ALL HIS SCOTTISH BEGGARS BACK TO THE SCOTTISH MOUNTAINS? WHY DO YOU THINK HE SAID THAT? AND THIS WAS IN 1605 TO.

YOU POSSESS THE TYPICAL PATHETIC THIRD WORLD ATTITUDE. ALL YOU ARE DOING IS TRYING TO JUSTIFY BEING A PARASITE. YOU MUST FEEL INADEQUATE TO HAVE SUCH A STUPID ATTITUDE. IMAGINE THAT. TRYING TO JUSTIFY BEING A FREE LOADER BY WHINING AND MOANING ABOUT THINGS THAT DIDNT AFFECT YOU. MAYBE YOU SHOULD TRY GETTING A JOB INSTEAD OF MAKING UP FAIRY STORIES TO JUSTIFY BEING A NONCE!

"I could go on all night"

Oh please do come back. I have enjoyed pulling your immature and ridiculous "arguments" apart.

"I am proud of the massive contribution that little Scotland has made to the world which hugely surpasses that made by UK (or England, which most of your contributors think is the same thing).
The sooner we're out the better - and the better for England too as it would then have to make a real job of runnig an economy without relying on revenues from Spotland's oil and vast reserves of surplus energy"

you're not even scotch jimmy. Keep your beggar nose out of our business.

[David McEwan Hill]

Hereward the Wake? Are you sure there isn't an "n" in there somewhere?
Is it any wonder sensible Scots want away from the sort of raving loony that has just posted that diatribe?
I'm not surprised either that about 60,000 English people have opted to emigrate to Scotland over the last 12 months.
By the way in return you can keep Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, John Reid, Alisair Darling, Eric Joyce and Douglas Alexander and in fact all the other Scots Labour MPS who run England. Doesn't say much for English MPS, does it?

[Scotty]

If Tim or Sam are around, could I complain about Hereward the wake's obscene and offensive post.

[Tory Loyalist]

Tsk, tsk. Still trying to silence the opposition, "Scotty"?

Oh but I forgot. You tell us you are a Scotsman who lives in Ayr, birthplace of St Rabbie, who never spoke or wrote an offensive word in the course of his short life

Or was it Southend?

[Ian]

As a Scot resident in the Highlands, sadly I am forced to agree. The film Braveheart did great damage to our country. Many, but all too few of us, worked very hard to avoid devolution, but were outvoted by the braying hordes from Lothian / Strathclyde. During the so-called Highland Clearances, which the Irish correctly call The Potato
Famine, anyone with any get-up-and-go got up and went, leaving the ullage to stay here, whinge and breed. If you go to Tesco's on a Saturday morning you will see the end product, in spades. The resulting Holyrood "Parliament" is all that we feared, and if the Nats get their way it can only get worse. At least it will make
England a Labour-free zone, and all you will have to do is to deal with Ca'Moron (use a Gaelic dictionary to see what the name means).

[David McEwan Hill]

Nothing in the world is quite as disgusting as a cringing Scot like Ian. The Craven Scotch, as they are now called, live in strange world in their own heads in which Scotland and the Scots are the only nation in the world with poor people, stupid people and bad people and everwhere else - even Bongo-Bongo land - is better than their homeland. Problem is the rest of us now recognise the depth of stupidity that fuels such delusions but the deluded don't.
Eat your heart out James Clerk Maxwell, Adam Smith, John Muir et al. You obviously should have been born English.
His post is in fact absolute cack. Look that up in a Gaelic dictionary

[Scotty]

"You tell us you are a Scotsman who lives in Ayr"
Southend, CCHQ, Ayrshire. Err no, you keep trying to infer I come from anyone of these places. You need to get a map of Scotland out and start reading up on the Scottish conservative party while your at it.