Show Scotland the Truth

D J Webb

I’ve become increasingly disillusioned with the behaviour of the Scottish Nationalists. They will promise the moon on independence. Whether they deliver it or not afterwards makes no difference: people will have taken the leap into the unknown by then.

Is there a way of showing the Scottish people what they’re getting into?

Yes, there is.

1. David Cameron should announce that, if elected, he will pass a law making Scotland a dependent territory from the following tax year (April 6, 2016). Scotland would then have full autonomy, along the lines of the autonomy of the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.

2. Scotland would keep the pound, just as the dependent territories do.

3. The Scottish would remain British citizens and free movement of labour would continue.

4. There would be no fiscal transfers to Scotland. Scotland would go “cold turkey” on day one.

5. Scotland would have full control over all oil in the North Sea and could set whatever tax rates it chose.

6. The dependent territory of Scotland would not be able to issue bonds or other debt instruments, and would take on 10% of the UK national debt.

7. Banks whose balance sheets exceeded Scottish GDP would be required to relocate their headquarters to England, or lose their authorised status as financial insitutions in England.

8. After five years, Scotland, if it liked the arrangement could continue it, or opt for full independence. If it opted for reintegration into the UK, there should be no devolution. They should be reintegrated on a county level, with no national Scottish Parliament.

9. No Scottish MPs would sit in the British House of Commons.

10. We could consider the same arrangement for Northern Ireland.

11. Just as Greenland, a Danish possession, has left the EU, Scotland could opt to stay in or leave the EU, although that would have implications for freedom of movement with England and Wales.

Nicola Sturgeon would find herself having to show what her promises really amounted to.

20 thoughts on “Show Scotland the Truth

  1. I do not see the point of number 7.

    The non-Scottish UK would have no responsibility for Scottish domiciles banks or branches from day one, otherwise the borrowings of a Scottish dependent territory would be dangerous to the rest of us.

    I recognise your evident annoyance with all this but at its heart is the childish political experiments played by the juvenile politicians at Westminster for the past 25 years. They think as they did at University when trying to impress their tutor when they should be thinking in geo-political terms.

  2. This would be not enough for the SNP – as, for example, it would not allow them to borrow lots of money (and turn Scotland into Greece – which appears to be their aim), and too much for the Unionists – who want Scots in MPs in the United Kingdom Parliament.

    So what is, I fully admit, a well intentioned compromise (suggested by Mr Webb in total good faith) would not be acceptable to either side in Scotland.

    Perhaps if the proposal was modified to allow Scots MPs to continue to sit in the House of Commons, the proposal might be acceptable to the Unionist side in Scotland.

    Greenland is, I believe, now independent of Denmark – but I think it still has the same monarchy (a bit like the position of England and Scotland before 1707 – perhaps altering that relationship in 1707 was a mistake).

    I have long thought that the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands should declare full independence – of the British government NOT of the Crown (after all Canada and so on still have the same monarchy as ourselves). The interference of the British government in the affairs of islands it openly admits it would NOT defend (for example see what happened to the Channel Islands in 1940) is an outrage.

    What business of London is it whether or not the Isle of Man has Corporal Punishment, or what the inheritance laws of Sark are?

    The British government should be told to go away and mind its own affairs.

    • Paul-we couldn’t defend the Channel Islands in 1940.Was just unfeasible. Scottish Unionism?The SNP rose from humble beginnings-why can’t an SUP do the same?

      • Mark I am not saying that Britain could have defended the Channel Island in 1940 – but why does that give London any right to order the Channel Islands (or the Isle of Man) about? None of the “suggestions” that come out of London are any good – they are all “liberal” rubbish, and it is time that the British government was told to mind its own business. Do you know what department of the British government deals with the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands? The Home Office – it is a calculated insult.

        An SUP? The only votes it could get would be Conservative ones – i.e. the one Conservative seat in Scotland. Besides remember the front cover of the Spectator magazine a few months ago?

        Those cold eyed students – utterly closed minded and brainwashed (the sort of utter horrors we both know so well), what do you think the young generation in Scotland are like?

        Actually there has always been a suspicion of formal education in England – in the past that has been a bad thing. It is no accident that, historically, Scotland actually produced a disproportionate number of educated people – pushing progress forward in all fields…..

        But what happens when formal education starts to be dominated by evil rubbish? Then the disadvantage of an anti formal education bias in the culture, becomes an advantage.

        It is the same in the United States – the North has historically had a great respect for formal education, the South (with a rather different culture) historically has had rather less respect for it.

        That was a disadvantage when formal education was spreading good ideas and attitudes – but becomes an advantage when the schools and universities start to spread stuff that is both wrong and evil.

  3. As for the long term – the Scottish Unionists tend to be older (much older) than the Nationalists, They tend to be people who remember the battles and wars the United Kingdom fought together – the young in Scotland do not even remember the Falklands War (let alone take pride in it).

    This indicates a grim future for the Union in the long term.

    • It’s a good point, but 90% of the land area of Scotland is functionally-worthless (you don’t exactly mine whisky and sheep) except for potential mineral wealth. Ah…hang on there…..! Hmmmm….

  4. The simple problem is that the Nats are playing Westminster like a violin because they know two things; firstly, that the British parties are desperate not to lose Scotland and will do anything to avoid it, and secondly that they are desperate to maintain the Westminster Parliament system appointing the PM and cabinet, and will do anything to maintain that. The current Commons is simply incompatible with the devolved parliaments; until somebody admits that, there will be no reasonable compromise; just pandering to the Nats.

    This thing will run and run.

  5. Here’s my pennyworth. The Tories will win the next election with a good working majority. They will go into the campaign with the simple message: “Vote Labour, Get Salmond.” Labour will bomb among the white working classes in England, and die in Scotland. The Tories will then fix the Constitution so that Scotland stops being a problem.

    I assume, of course, a certain strategic sense in Mr Cameron and his friends. I may be wrong.

      • The most optimistic UKIP forecasts are for 40+ MPs. Everyone though really knows this won’t happen. I think they will get between 6 and 9, mainly in the extreme south east to go with/near Clacton and Rochester, and in some ex-labour seats in the North of England.
        The Greens sadly will get about four to five, probably from the LibDems. They’ll hold Brighton which will have a rigged result, as it must, for that androgenous-Lucas fellow with the short hair or whatever he’s called can’t be allowed to be voted out.
        Then they will gain some semi-rural/semi-suburban ones in the West and Southwest, where there are lots of articulate public-sector-workers with woodburning stoves in their commutable-cottages.

        • I think they’ll get Clacton and Thanet South – lucky to get Rochester again, but might hold it. Could get Eastleigh (Chris Huhne’s seat) and maybe Great Grimsby and heywood in manchester and maybe Boston – and that’s probalby it.

  6. I think another point worth mentioning is that in my view, what we are seeing in Scotland isn’t really nationalism. It is not some great primal urge among the Scots to be truly independent. It is, rather, a furious anti-Toryism that has arisen since the 1980s, since they blame the Tory government of that time for all their woes, wrecking socialism, destroying industry and so on. What you hear over and over from “nationalists” is a demand that they not be governed by the Tory Party.

    So I think while the SNP really do want independence, many of those supporting them will be most happy with a system in which Scotland can use a “block vote” to prevent Tory governments; which is what is currently being constructed in this ridiculous fudged mess which will retain the “parliamentary majority system”.

    • If Ian is right, then in fact Scotland will _have to go_ . To allow groups of Scottish socialist nationalists to be allowed to prevent conservative governments in England, which is seen by them as a separate nation, over _A BORDER_ (Wales can see to itself, it’s socialist enough anyway) is simply _bad and wrong_ .

      There aren’t any conditions under which a crowd of people, pretending to be unanimous (and they aren’t anyway) in one part of the Garden, can prevent the Majority Owner of the (initially entire) garden form running it how he and his voters wants and want, assuming they (the dissenters) want to be and to remain part of it.

      If they don’t like the plan, then they can _go_ . We’ll partition the Garden, and they can have their bit and plant the plants they like, and others will have theirs and plant the plants which they differently like.


      For the avoidance of doubt, I would also add that I would not favour this solution in regard to the UK and Scotland, speaking personally. Too much water has flown under bridges and too much blood has been shed, for it to all be for nothing. Almost 1,400 years. Even “Europe” isn’t that old.

    • If I’d been granted even the smidgeing-est-smidging of an opportunity to _wreck socialism_ , Ian, THEN … _I WOULD HAVE TAKEN IT WITH BOTH HANDS_ .

      All human beings would so do if truly asked, and in all honesty.

  7. Ian – the decline of the Conservative Party in Scotland started in the 1960s, and it was quite sudden – almost as if there had been a change in the ideas taught…… in a society that, unlike England, has always valued abstract ideas over experience (even in Scots Law one starts from a principle and then tries to fit the cases one gets to the principle – in English Law one starts from the individual case and then tries to find similar cases in the past) it did not even speed up in the 1980s, the decline carried on at the same rate (so the idea that Mrs T. caused it was a myth).

    [Although the destruction of the old counties in Scotland in the late 1960s (the counties were the basis of Conservative organisation in Scotland – and the last place where the old Scots gentry and nobility has any influence) was also a heavy blow. Imagine that the English counties were de facto abolished – and de facto Regions replaced them. The left would massively gain from such a move].

    Actually I rather admire the Scots way of thinking – it can lead to very impressive results (and did historically). However, it is very dependent on starting from the right ideas (the right principles), if one starts working from ideas, from principles, that are radically wrong…….

    Sean – I do not know to welcome your optimism or dread it.

    If you are correct the nation is saved from the pathetic “Red Ed” – although it is difficult to fear a man whom, I suspect, does not know how to wipe his bottom. But, if you are correct, the Conservative party will be in office when the Collapse of the Credit Bubble (T.M.) finally occurs.

    Although I do wake up each morning expecting it to finally happen and have done for years – I can be a tad obsessive about it.

  8. As a sweaty sock; I would like to apologise. Some of us agree with you, however the vast majority of my kin are entitled halfwits who have swallowed the Labour line that the universe owes them in some shape or form.


  9. This takes us close to the idea floated by Jo Grimond in the early 1970’s … a previous period of SNP ascendancy, albeit a false dawn … that the UK should be replaced by a Confederation of British States..
    The idea that banks with overlarge balance sheets should be transfered to London is dangerous in the extreme. The underlying issues of debt, of currencies issued out of debt, the banking system, and of so-called ‘derivatives’ which add up to a huge multiple of global GDP, both in the UK and across the globe, lies unresolved. Indeed global debt continues to burgeon at an eye-watering rate. Little wonder that economies, which are super-saturated with debt, cannot ‘grow’. Therefore should Scotland be allowed to dump potentially enormous liabilities on England?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s