|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Letters
Independence in the UK? 26/04/07 Dear Sir (Herald), Your report on the interview with Alex Salmond (April 26) cannot be allowed to pass without comment. Mr Salmond is reported as stating, “If Scotland were an independent country within the EU, then we would control 99% of our revenue…….99% is independence in an inter-dependent world” This is not the first time he has made this claim. At a recent candidates’ hustings, I was presented with a SNP document which, in an answer on joining the euro, states, “In fact, as an independent country in the Euro, Scotland would have more say over its currency than it does at present.” Both of those statements are so ludicrously false that it beggars belief only the Free Scotland Party is picking up on them. If the New SNP under the leadership of Alex Salmond now accepts fiscal autonomy as “independence”, it should be very easy to jump into bed with either the Lib/Dems or the Tories after May 3rd, as both Unionist parties have accepted fiscal autonomy as a possibility. Is the next step for the SNP to claim, we can now be independent in the UK? To claim that it matters not a jot which external bank controls Scotland’s monetary policy and interest rates, makes a mockery of all the SNP posturing about independence. No monetary union can survive without political control and fiscal harmonisation, hence the creeping integration going on apace in the EU. If that is what the New SNP stands for, let it at least be honest enough to say that. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie More to Independence than cash 18/4/07 Dear Sir (Herald) At last, at last, at long last, a Scottish journalist who has something to say about Scottish independence, without putting a price tag on it. Ruth Wishart (April 18) is right when she asks, “can we not raise our eyes above the balance sheet”? But why has it taken so long? You have afforded me space on many an occasion to argue the case for Scottish independence and more often than not I have argued that independence is about the restoration of dignity, self-respect and self-confidence, all of which have been systematically stripped from the Scottish people by the Unionist parties and their constant refrain that Scotland is peopled by subsidy junkies. They bear much of the responsibility for the lack of self-worth that permeates throughout much of Scottish society. Unfortunately, Scotland’s journalists have done little to help by either, parroting the Unionist mantra of the “Union dividend” or, ignoring the damage being done to the Scottish psyche. Nationalists of my generation were around a long time before oil was discovered yet we could, if required, make an economic case for independence. What exercised us however, was the need for independence for its own sake. That did not mean we had no aspirations for an independent Scotland; on the contrary, we were bursting with ideas of how we could make the country a better place to live. The last thought in our minds however, was how much it was going to cost, or alternatively, how much was in it for us. In my days in the SNP we were dubbed the “fundamentalists or fundies” by the conditional Nationalists who were later to take over the SNP, and by the Scottish media, both of whom tended to use the term as a form of derision or abuse. Had there been less emphasis on the economics of independence, we would not be in the middle of this unseemly bidding war to see which party can provide the biggest trough. An independent Scotland will be what we make of it and money will be the east of our problems. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Independence dropped by SNP? 12/03/07 Alex Salmond
MP Dear Alex Although not totally surprised by the comments contained in the report carried in Scotland on Sunday (11/3/07) anent your willingness to “park” independence during the first term of the new Scottish Executive if you are appointed as First Minister, I feel it is only fair to ask you to either confirm or deny the truth of what has been claimed. I would be amazed if the report was not an accurate account of the views expressed by Sir Tom Farmer as it is unlikely such a prominent businessman would be quoted so extensively, unless he had given his permission. But Nationalists throughout Scotland will be keen to know if Sir Tom Farmer’s expressed views, are indeed an accurate reflection of your own. Under your successive terms of leadership Alex, the SNP has gone from being THE party of independence in Scotland, to being a party, which has supinely accepted every progressive surrender of sovereignty to the EU, almost without reservation. The decision of the SNP to commit itself to allowing either London or Frankfurt to determine monetary policy in an “independent” Scotland, without any consideration of placing that responsibility where it rightly belongs, in Scotland’s capital, merely underlines how far the party has drifted from its very raison d’etre. If the SNP is no longer about the restoration of sovereignty to the people of Scotland, what is the purpose of the party, other than to become just another political party grasping for a share of power in an already overcrowded political playing field? In short, is the SNP any longer fit for purpose? I look forward to your response. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Referendum on membership of the EU? 19/2/07 Dear Sir (Herald) Both Patrick Kirkwood and Alex Orr (February 19) quite rightly condemn the Lib/Dems for their ludicrous attacks on the SNP and personal attacks on Alex Salmond. They are also correct to attack the Lib/Dems for their refusal to hold a referendum on Scottish independence. However, both Mr Kirkwood and Mr Orr could strengthen their case if they could persuade the SNP to agree to a referendum on membership of the EU, rather than dogmatically declare that an independent Scotland WILL be a member. The party has agreed a referendum on leaving the UK, rather late in the day has also agreed a referendum on adoption of the euro, although why it has rejected the idea of a Scottish currency is beyond me; therefore it only makes sense, as well as being democratic, to offer a referendum on membership of the EU. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Bank of England or the European Central Bank 15/2/07 Dear Sir (Scotsman) There is no doubt that more of Scotland’s business community are expressing more confidence in an independent Scotland’s ability to go it alone, and not before time (Jim Mather MSP 14/2/07). However Mr Mather and the SNP will not be providing them with the necessary tools to build a successful economy, which independence would give them. Mr Mather and the SNP are still refusing to explain how giving control of monetary policy to either the Bank of England or the European Central Bank, is going to give Scotland either independence or the tools necessary to do the job. It is an absolute nonsense to suggest that Scotland under the SNP version of independence, could be separated from the rest of the UK, retain sterling as the currency, until it was decided to adopt the euro, and still have the economic tools and the freedom to use them. An independent Scottish currency would allow Scotland to track sterling in the interim, while retaining ultimate control of monetary policy. To adopt the euro would place an independent Scotland in exactly the same relationship as it now “enjoys” with the Bank of England, where decisions about monetary policy as it applies to Scotland, will bear little or no relationship to Scotland’s needs. The SNP has convinced itself it is going to win at least a share of power at the elections in May. It can almost smell success and is determined to try to allay as many imagined fears as it thinks the Scottish people hold. Its own fear of failure at the polls, is causing it to fall apart at the seams and forget why the party was formed. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Independence and/or Applied Economics? !4/02/07 Dear Sir (Herald) Alf Young (Herald 13/2/07) is quite right of course when he says that the arguments about Scottish independence are much too concerned with applied economics. It is also true to say, that as one of the top financial journalists in Scotland over a number of years, Alf has contributed to that debate. The anti-Scottish campaign conducted by New Labour at the moment has disgusted even some Tories, although they and the Lib/Dems are no slouches at caricaturing Scots as subsidy junkies, incapable of having any kind of ambition, other than to continue to collect the alleged largesse from London. Imagine the furore
if it was said of any other UK minority, such as the Afro-Caribbean,
Asian, Chinese or Eastern European immigrants; that they lived off the
subsidies provided by the English. Or, that they lacked the ability
and talent to make their own decisions by virtue of their origin. Not
only do we allow it to be said of Scots, too many Scots actually believe
it and happily indulge in the destruction of the dignity, self-respect
and self-confidence of an entire nation. Unfortunately, the problem with the New SNP, the self-styled party of independence, is that too many of its leadership and their acolytes are themselves conditional Nationalists. Many of them would not be Nationalists if they thought they could achieve their economic/political/social objectives within the UK. So many of their arguments for giving up sovereignty to the EU are a mirror image of the arguments of the Unionists for remaining within the UK, that they have become opposite sides of the same bad penny. Give the Scottish people a feeling of their own self-worth and the belief that dignity and self-respect are worth a great deal more than a feeling of dependency, then we might achieve true independence. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie EU, Euro, instability, inflation and unemployment 29/1/07 Dear Sir (Herald), Alex Neil MSP (January 29) has again ignored my request for an explanation of how the SNP can equate giving up control of monetary policy and independence. Instead, the SNP’s arch Euro-fantasist, Alex Orr, suggests that it is mere narrow Nationalism for an independent Scotland to have its own currency. Such is the nature of the New SNP. Mr Orr goes on to claim that Scottish representation on the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (ECB), would ensure Scotland would be better served than it is by the MPC of the Bank of England. He ignores, quite deliberately of course, that the ECB is not there to further the interests of any individual member state, it is there to set monetary policy for the euro zone as a whole. As all member states are represented, is Mr Orr suggesting that those of Italy, Spain and Greece are deliberately creating difficulties for their respective governments in handling their domestic economies; or that the representatives of France and Germany deliberately created the situation whereby their own governments were forced to break the conditions of the Growth and Stability Pact? Four of the five biggest economies in the EU are on that short list. Mr Orr’s claim that Scottish membership of the euro zone would give us lower inflation and exchange rate stability, also ignores the reality for members of the euro zone since the currency was launched, several of whom have suffered both inflation and high unemployment simultaneously. An independent Scotland in full control of its own monetary policy, one of the major levers of economic policy, could decide to track any currency it chose, or peg the Scottish currency to any other currency, if economic conditions demanded. But it would also have the freedom to change interest rates and set its own course at any time it chose to do so. Allowing either London or Brussels to determine monetary policy will allow Scotland to do none of those things. I will not ask Mr Orr to explain the connection between independence and control of the economy, since independence is the last thing he seeks. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Euro problems 26/1/07 Dear Editor (Scotsman) Alex Neil, (26 January) is still dodging the real question which should be concerning Nationalists. He says, quite rightly, “The whole point of independence is to allow people to make their own decisions…” and yet, the SNP’s policy on the currency is to allow either the Bank of England or the European Central Bank to make the important decisions on monetary policy. Neither Bank will ever act in an independent Scotland’s best interests. Bruce Skivington claims, “ All the countries in the euro zone, including the Irish Republic, don’t seem to have a problem sharing an exchange rate and setting interest rates”. That is simply not true. Italy, Spain and Greece have major problems with the euro and Italy has been warned that unless it improves its competitiveness, it may have to leave the euro zone, with Spain not far behind. Both Germany and France have broken the conditions of the Growth and Stability Pact in recent times and inflation in Eire hit record levels as they were forced to bring down interest rates from 6% to 2% over a period of three months when the euro was introduced. The notion that one size fits all is a nonsense and no country that aspires to be independent can afford to let anyone other than its own central bank control its monetary policy. The SNP has lost sight of that. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Who decides economic policy; London, Brussels, Edinburgh? 24/01/07 Dear Editor (Herald) Significantly, Alex Neil MSP ignores all the points I made in my correspondence of January 22nd, much as the SNP has been trying to do for years, and reserves his fire for Messrs Muldoon and Fitzpatrick. They are easy targets for Mr Neil because they can be lampooned as Labour Party Unionists. My Nationalist credentials however, are impeccable and pre-date those of Mr Neil, who himself came to the SNP via the Labour Party and the ill-fated Jim Sillars’s Scottish version of the same. I do know the difference between fiscal and monetary policy, which is one of the reasons I have asked on several occasions in these columns, that the SNP explain how giving control of monetary policy to any bank outwith Scotland can be equated with independence. Contrary to Mr Neil’s claims, the SNP policy on currency is anything but consistent and, as Alf Young pointed out (January 23rd) most commentators have assumed the SNP wanted to join the Euro. I have debated in recent months with three leading members of the party and each of them said the party favoured joining the Euro. Mr Neil attempts to soften that position to one in which the SNP is “favourable to entry to the euro”. Is there any real difference? The one question the SNP refuses to answer is why any country, which aspires to be independent, would allow its monetary policy to be dictated by any central bank other than its own? How can the SNP have any credibility if it now wants to leave monetary policy to either the Bank of England or the European Central Bank, neither of which will have Scottish economic interests at the top of the agenda? The SNP can continue to ignore me, until May, but as a life-long Nationalist, they cannot dismiss me as someone who has belonged to any party that has deliberately sacrificed Scottish interests, either to further my career or because of Union loyalty. As a Nationalist, I am asking Mr Neil to explain how either London or Brussels is better suited than Edinburgh, to control an independent Scotland’s monetary policy. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Who
decides economic policy? Dear Editor (Herald), John Robertson MP, will wait a long time if he is looking for an explanation from Alex Salmond (Herald 18/1/07) of how, allowing either the Bank of England or the European Central Bank, to set interest rates and control monetary policy for an independent Scotland, will benefit Scotland. For the past eight years, since the SNP decided that it would join the euro after independence, I have tried to get any member of the SNP to explain to me how allowing Frankfurt to control monetary policy equates with independence. I have debated with some of the leading members of the party and have yet to get an answer. No, I don’t mean an answer that satisfies me, but an answer of any description. Mr Salmond’s latest policy statement, made on the hoof I suspect, that Scotland would keep the pound sterling until a referendum could be held on whether or not to join the euro, beggars belief. What if the people of Scotland decide against the euro? Given the problems the likes of Italy and Spain are having with the euro, will the euro zone still exist? Will an independent Scotland’s monetary policy then continue to be dictated from London? For decades, the SNP claimed quite justifiably, that monetary policy in the UK was set with the interests of the south east of England in mind, and that interest rates set in order to curb inflationary pressure created in the south east of England, were detrimental to the economic interests of Scotland. That still applies. Until Mr Salmond decided this should be SNP policy, any control from London was anathema to Nationalists. Now, it seems it is perfectly acceptable, at least until control can be transferred to Brussels. Should Scots not now be asking the SNP, “Independence, what independence?” Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Independence about more than economics 13/1/07 Dear Editor (Scotsman) You state (editorial today), “The SNP has, after all, argued the case for independence on economic grounds, so it can hardly complain when the chancellor fights back on the same ground.” The only argument ever used by Unionists such as the Chancellor, against Scottish independence, has been the economic argument. The SNP is merely replying in kind, and it is the biggest mistake the party ever made. They have allowed the battle to be fought on Unionist terms and on their ground, reducing the debate to the basest level, making the Scottish people sound like beasts fighting for the biggest share of the trough. The argument about independence is about dignity, self-respect and self-confidence, all of which people like Gordon Brown et al have done their best to destroy in the Scottish people. If the only argument that can be made for 300 years of Union with England, is that Scotland is now an economic basket case and unfit to be a normal, independent nation state, what does that say about people like Mr Brown who are responsible for making it that way? We have heard all the scare stories before, about how our manufacturing industries would be destroyed if it were not for the Union. The Scottish electorate listened to Mr Brown’s predecessors in the 1970s and since then our manufacturing sector has been all but dismantled. His attention is now focused on the financial services sector, which, he alleges, will take thousands of jobs to England unless we remain in the Union. Tell that to the people of Perth who, in recent years, have seen the world headquarters of the once mighty GA, turned into a glorified call centre. The “Union Dividend” that has been Scotland’s legacy is made up of lies over oil, Iraq, public expenditure and just about everything else New Labour has touched. Why should Scots now believe a word Brown or any other Unionist politician utters? Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie An Independent Scotland and the European Court of Human Rights 08/01/07 Dear Editor (Scotsman) The best thing that could happen would be for Scots to have to re-negotiate entry to the EU (Scotsman 8/1/07) because we could then have the debate about entry that has been denied us for years. It would greatly help however, if those who contribute to your reports could at least be accurate about the position of Scotland anent the EU. The European Convention on Human Rights has nothing to do with the EU and whether or not Scotland was a member of the EU, we would still have access to the Court of Human Rights. Scotland has received not a penny in aid from the EU. Any money that Scotland has received in structural funds, represents no more than a portion of the contributions she has made. The UK has been a net contributor to the EU since joining and, despite the claims to the contrary, Scotland has been a net contributor to the UK over the same period. It is not rocket science to work out that Scotland is not a net beneficiary by being a member of the EU. The difficulty will be in getting the accurate figures to prove the claim conclusively, one way or the other, since there is so much corruption in the EU, the accounts have not been signed off for the past twelve years. Scotland would not have to be a member of the EU to be a member of the single market, witness Norway and Iceland. Whether that would be to Scotland’s advantage is another discussion. There is a big world out there, willing to trade and not as determined to see Scotland isolated, as it would appear our “friends” in the UK and the EU seem to be, unless we are prepared to roll over and be dominated. It would seem that any discussion on Scotland’s place in the EU is to be conducted on he same basis as Scotland’s place in the UK – give the electorate the old mushroom treatment and, if that doesn't’t work, well scare the living daylights out of them. Your readers deserve better than this bilge. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie California, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Scotland and the EU 04/01/07 Dear Editor (Herald) Jim Mather, SNP enterprise spokesman, is right to take George Lyon and the Lib/Dems to task for their lack of ambition for Scotland, (Herald 4/1/07).The Lib/Dems want Scotland to be “another California”, be a part of a federal state and have the power to raise some of its own revenue. So what else is new; the old Liberal Party advocated that “solution” to Scotland’s problems in the days of Campbell Bannerman. Mr Mather on the other hand, wants Scotland to emulate Norway, Iceland or Ireland, as if all three countries have the same freedom to develop their respective economies. As we are now in election mode, Mr Mather and the SNP are going to have to be a great deal more honest in just what kind of Scotland they want to see. The SNP wants full membership of the EU for Scotland, including membership of the euro, which is the situation in Ireland. Neither Norway nor Iceland is a member of the EU and both control their own monetary policy, which is a considerable difference from having the country’s monetary policy determined by the European Central Bank. It is true that the Irish economy has done well and that it has been voted one of the best places in the world to live, according to the UN. However, it has reached that position by taking an entirely different route from that taken by Norway and Iceland. If the SNP continue to make those comparisons, they must also come clean and admit that while Norway and Iceland are countries which have been highly successful outside of the EU, they are not countries which the SNP wants Scotland to emulate. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Government from London and Brussels better than Independence? 02/01/07 Dear Editor The campaign to persuade Scots of the folly of voting for independence in May, is well under way. From now until then, we can look forward to being told ad nauseam, that independence will lead to poverty, isolation, the flight of business capital, the end of oil and the world as we know it and a return to the dark ages. Most frightening of all, Scots will be cut off from their relatives in England by passport controls and we will all be deprived of the benefits of being governed by London. The reality of independence is that Scots would be cut off, divorced and separated from the deceit, the sleaze and corruption that has pervaded all London governments in living memory. There would be no more Trident, no more illegal wars and no more wastage of young Scottish lives. There would be a realistic assessment of oil reserves, rather than the evasions, half-truths and lies that have made up the official claptrap that has emanated from Westminster since oil was discovered. For the first time, Scots would learn just how much of their resources have been swallowed over the years, by the ever-widening maw of Westminster’s “unidentifiable public expenditure”. Those who worry about passports at the Border have obviously not had to fly anywhere in the UK in the recent past. Nor have they had to open a bank account or buy any financial services product. They will shortly be required to carry ID at all times, have their DNA kept on file as a matter of public record, whether or not they have committed a crime; all of this in the name of anti-terrorism laws that are more the hall mark of a totalitarian state, than that of a democracy dealing with an outside threat. Most important of all, independence would mean the end to the destruction of Scots’ self-image, self-confidence and their feeling of self-worth, by politicians who encourage their constituents to wallow in self-loathing in order to perpetuate a system of government that “is not fit for purpose” to coin a phrase. Can independence really be worse than government from London and Brussels? Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie GERs, pound sterling, euro, control from London, control from Brussels 20/12/06 Dear Editor (Herald) I agree with every word written by both Angus MacNeil MP and Alex Salmond MP, in their criticisms of Wendy Alexander’s use of the Government’s Expenditure and Revenue for Scotland (Gers), (Herald 19/12/06). The dishonesty of the Westminster parties on this issue has been well documented for years and they will learn come May next year, that this scare story at least, has lost much of the resonance it once had. However, the SNP should not fall into the same trap of being less than honest with the Scottish people. Alex Salmond recently said that an independent Scotland would use the pound sterling until a referendum could be held on whether or not to join the euro. Having campaigned for generations, arguing that London’s control of monetary policy was a major stumbling block to Scottish economic development, the leader of the self-styled party of independence, is now saying that situation will be allowed to continue, at least in the short term. The only alternative he offers is transferring control of monetary policy from London to Brussels, but continues to argue that this means independence. Until Mr Salmond recently launched his initiative, any control from London was anathema for Nationalists. Now, it seems it is perfectly acceptable, at least until control can be transferred to Brussels. Should Scots not now be asking the SNP, “Independence, what independence?” Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie GERs, spurious profit and loss account 12/12/06 Dear Editor (Herald) Commenting on the GERS report, another journal concluded, “The GERS report will not settle the independence argument, but it is a good place to start.” I do not see why; the statistics are incomplete, some are based on assumptions rather than evidence and there has never been a proper accounting of those areas of UK spending that are “not identifiable”. In other words, given the propensity of UK governments to lie, particularly when it comes to the actual oil reserves, which have come out of, and are still available in, the Scottish sector of the North Sea, why should any Scot believe the GERS report? To decide whether or not we should be independent, based on some spurious profit and loss account, is both crass and demeaning to Scots in general. Notwithstanding all the arguments, which are inevitably raised if all that can be claimed on behalf of 300 years of Union, is a permanent Scottish fiscal deficit, what does it say about all those Unionist politicians who have made their career by destroying the dignity and self-worth of an entire nation? For those who believe that Scotland is in receipt of a permanent subsidy (Union dividend is the current buzz term), how does it feel to live off the backs of the unemployed, the socially deprived and the homeless in England, all of whom would be better off, if Scotland’s subsidy was spent on them? Not only do you believe that Scotland has been in receipt of more than she deserves, you demand that that situation should continue ad infinitum. Have you no self-respect? The level of debate on independence has to be raised way above the balance sheet approach because that suits only Unionists, largely because they control the balance sheets. In any case, any country that will be persuaded against having its freedom on the grounds it MIGHT cost an extra 1p on the basic rate of tax, hardly deserves to be independent. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Latvia's self-belief 06/12/06 Dear Editor (Herald) Ian Macwhirter writes, (Herald 6/12/06) “If only we could bottle Latvia’s self-belief”, which I find just a wee bit rich, given that he has not been exactly to the fore in promoting Scotland’s self-belief in the past. We could make a start by getting rid of all those politicians who have made their careers in the Unionist parties in Scotland, destroying Scottish self-belief, whenever it has the temerity to raise its head. The recent outburst of hysterical Unionism from Blair, Reid, Brown et al should merit nothing but derision, and, to be fair, there has been some critical comment from those such as Lord Fraser, who have spent some considerable energy making the same arguments in the past. What parent would deliberately and consistently, set out to destroy the self-confidence, dignity and self-worth of their children? In today’s society they would be prosecuted for child abuse, and quite rightly so. Employers must mind their tongues and their behaviour, lest an employee turn to the law as a consequence of being “offended” or having had their “feelings bruised”. And yet, Labour, Tory and Lib/Dems set out at every election to abuse the entire nation of Scotland, aided and abetted by their friends in the media. Brought up on a diet of being told we are too small, too stupid, too poor, incapable of achieving anything worthwhile without Westminster’s guiding hand, it is little wonder cots have had little or no self-belief. Such was the lack of confidence that even the SNP decided that Scotland needed the comfort blanket of the EU, if Scots were ever to be persuaded to dump the comfort blanket of the UK. Now the SNP is firmly in the Unionist camp – a different Union perhaps but a Union nevertheless. Let us hope the current desire for independence, as reflected in the opinion polls, survives until May 2007, thereby making for interesting times ahead. Yours sincerely Jim Fairlie Scotland funds London Olympics 06 06 06 Dear Editor Jim Sheridan, Scottish Labour MP, asked in Parliament, 05/06/06, whether devolved bodies will be expected to make any financial contribution towards the London Olympics. Tessa Jowell, Minister for Culture, Media & Sport replied that there would be no direct funding from any of the devolved authorities but that the lottery will be a major contributor to the costs of the Olympics with some diversion from other good causes, so indirectly there will be a consequence for the devolved Administrations. So, Lottery funding that was going to go to Scottish good causes will be cut to help fund a huge infrastructure project to the long term good of London. Londoners can enjoy a huge party in 2012, the long term benefit of the various sports buildings and Scotland can enjoy the cuts that are coming our your way for the next six years! Yours sincerely International implications of McKie case 22 05 06 Dear Editor Sunday evening's BBC Panorama programme on the McKie fingerprint issue has raised this case to a new level. The credibility of fingerprinting as an evidence source is now under question everywhere in the world. As was said on the programme, any defence lawyer worth their salt will raise the McKie case as an objection to fingerprint evidence. The McKie case is no longer a Scottish, domestic issue, it is an international issue. The confusion can only be cleared up with a full public enquiry. Was there an honest mistake or was there a cover-up? Playing silly, political games to cover the backs of the the former Justice Minister, Liberal Democrat Jim Wallace, and the current Justice Minister, Labour's Cathy Jamieson, is no longer an option. Justice is not being seen to be done in the McKie case, time that it was. Yours sincerely McKie case 05 05 06 Dear Editor What is there to hide in the Shirley McKie fingerprint case? There should be
a full public enquiry into this affair. The credibility of How high up the
line has the cover-up gone? Was the Justice Minister at the time, Liberal
Democrat Jim Wallace, involved? Is the current Justice If there is nothing to hide, why keep hiding it? Yours sincerely British Gas rises 07 02 06 Dear Editor The irony of living
in a rich country but being fuel poor, British Gas We can thank Gordon Brown and the other Labour Party hacks given a name check on the Radio 4 programme about the civil service in London making the political case against Scotland's Oil wealth and Independence. Gordon Brown et al put career first, well ahead of the prospects of the people of Scotland. What would have
happened in Scotland had we followed Norway's example and set up a Scottish
Statoil to manipulate the oil to Scotland's benefit? Yours sincerely Sovereignty surrendered to the EU 25 01 06 Dear Editor (Scotsman) Further
to Dr Cooper's letter (23 January), the situation with regards "In
passing the 1972 European Communities Act, Parliament surrendered Every national
court must set aside any national law that conflicts with Membership of the European Union is not entrenched. The 1972 Act may be repealed." In passing the 1972 European Communities Act, the Westminster Parliament did indeed "contract out" their responsibility for law-making to the European Union or the EEC as it was then. There are
several problems with this. The EEC, a trading organisation, Scotland
lives in a strange political, twilight world where the Scottish Scotland
could contract out of the EU and UK with a Scottish Parliament Yours sincerely EU driving Post Office Privatisation 27 12 05 Dear Editor Well done to all
the post men and post women and the counter staff in Appreciating a good
service like most of our MPs often do in their The EU is driving
the privatisation. EU directive 97/67/EC started the And from January
1, 2006, the Royal Mail loses its monopoly when EU There is a contradiction
in supporting the European Union but making There is one way
to deal with the Europen Union and that is to leave it, Yours sincerely Tavish transport policy spins over and over again 26 10 05 Dear Editor So, Tavish Scott, Transport Minister in the Labour/Liberal Democrat Scottish Executive, is holding consultation on the new national scheme for free bus travel for old and disabled folk as well as two free return ferry trips a year. A bit of spin here, surely. This is the same scheme that was first announced about a year ago. How many times will the policy be announced before it is actually implemented? Why are old and disabled folk being made to wait while Tavish, yet again, milks the policy for all it is worth? Get on with it! Talking about getting on with it, will the Transport Minister be doing anything about PSOs for islands flights? The islands have been waiting a long time for those. It is cold comfort to know that Tavish has been saying for the six years that he been an MSP how vital PSOs are to island life. As Transport Minister and an MSP for an island constituency, it is time for Tavish to put up or shut up! Yours sincerely Scottish Central Bank 19 09 05 Dear Editor (Herald) Iain A D Mann, Saturday 17th inst. writes, "Fiscal autonomy for Scotland is the only answer if the economy of Scotland is to prosper..." This has now become a well worn theme, started by the SNP, as it tried to argue that Scotland could be independent and still have its monetary policy run from Frankfurt. It is a nonsense. Having fiscal autonomy, or some control over the raising of revenues in, and from, Scotland would constitute only part control over the Scottish economy. If those revenues were to include the revenues from Scottish oil, it would mean an enormous increase in the sums of money at the disposal of the Scottish Executive. But to leave monetary policy in the hands of the Bank of England, or as the SNP argue, in the hands of the European Central Bank, would be to deny the Scottish Executive the power to use monetary and fiscal policy as complementary, the way in which they are used by every other independent country. There is only one way in which the Scottish economy is ever going to reach its potential and that is when both fiscal and monetary policy are controlled by an independent Scottish government and an independent Scottish Central Bank Yours sincerely Labour stole Scotland's Oil 14 09 05 Dear Editor (Herald) In your Editorial of 13th inst., "Westminster's guilty secret," you state, "Politics is demeaned and politicians demean themselves, when that happens," that, being the fact of lying to the Scottish people for over thirty years about Scotland's oil resources. You conclude, "It was wrong to keep Dr McCrone's report secret." Is that it? Is that the level of your wrath at having been fed, and swallowing, mince all this time? The Westminster establishment must be terrified. As for politicians demeaning themselves and politics, you should have no worries on that score, the Labour Party in Scotland has demeaned itself for generations and is incapable of conducting itself in any other manner, witness the response of Alistair Darling and Brian Wilson, to the news that McCrone's report had finally made its way into the public domain. The Labour Party in Scotland are the most contemptible and gutless collection of individuals involved in politics anywhere in the UK. The present generation of Nationalists are in danger of following in their footsteps. Nationalists of my generation, who fought the oil campaigns, were never in any doubt that the government was lying. We used to laugh at their ludicrous attempts to undermine the case for independence, based on economics. Unfortunately, the Scottish electorate were rather too gullible and thirled to the Labour Party, to be convinced that the party of Hardie, Johnston et al. were no more than bare faced liars. This generation of Nationalists have actually steeled themselves enough to ask for an apology. Big wowie! We would have had thousands demonstrating outside the Scottish Parliament. But what of Dewar, Smith, Cook, men who have been beatified since their death, and those who served alongside them, in Labour governments of the time and since? They not only knew the details of the report, they have continued to lie at every opportunity, about the potential economic consequences of Scottish independence. They are guilty of demeaning an entire nation, casting Scots in the role of spineless subsidy junkies, encouraging them to accept it is the only role they are capable of playing. Do we really deserve the politicians we get? Yours sincerely Independent of the EU? 11 09 05 Dear Editor (Herald) A remarkable piece from Alex Salmond, September 8, in which the SNP's flagship slogan 'Independence in Europe' is not mentioned once. A tacit admission, perhaps, that support by the SNP for the European Union is costing the SNP members and votes. Why support an organisation that insists that Scotland builds our ships outwith Scotland? Why support an organisation that insists that Scotland can not take VAT off once put on? Have you ever wondered why the VAT on heating can only be reduced to 5% but never removed? It is because the European Union insists that it is so. Just what does being independent mean to the SNP? The Scottish Parliament can only do what the Westminster Parliament allows it to do, and the Westminster Parliament can only do what the European Union allows it to do. An independent Scottish Parliament could only do what the European Union allowed it to do. Scotland should be independent of the UK and independent of the EU! Yours sincerely The EU Project and Federalism 01 06 05 Dear Editor (Herald) Alex Orr could well have written your editorial of May 30th. It is both insulting and patronising to suggest that anyone who opposes the onward march of EU federalism, does so out of an inability to understand what the great project is all about. I would suggest that as people learn more about the project, opposition will only increase further. Only one of the nine countries which have given the EU Constitution its blessing, asked the opinion of their electorate. It is widely assumed that had Germany put the decision to a referendum, the German people would also have voted no. Mr Maxwell (letters 31st May) summed up the view of the electorate rather well and put the blame where it belongs, on the shoulders of the politicians, who have pursued a conspiracy of silence, and the media, which has gone along with the conspiracy. When Peter Hain, Mandelson et al were force feeding us a diet of evasions, half truths and out and out lies, it should have been the responsibility of professional journalists to call these people to account. The SNP has been allowed to peddle the inherently dishonest "Independence in Europe" line for years, without ever being put under pressure by the media to explain the contradiction. The Free Scotland Party was formed a little over a year ago, by Scottish Nationalists who felt the Scottish people should be given the opportunity to vote for a party that not only wanted to see Scotland free of the Union with England, but which also opposed the incorporating union of the EU. The vote cast for our three candidates in the recent Westminster election, did not reflect the numbers who agreed with our sentiments, but put their vote elsewhere. There is no doubt however, that a proper debate should be held in this country, on the reality of the EU, as opposed to the myths perpetrated by Alex Orr and his colleagues. Yours sincerely EU Constitution turnout 02 06 05 Dear Editor The results of the French and Dutch EU Constitution referendums are very pleasing for anyone against the imposition of the United States of Europe.The French voted 55% against and the Dutch 62% against but what is more striking is the turnout. In the 2004 election of MEPs to the EU parliament in France and the Netherlands turnout was much lower than the turnout for the EU constitution. In France 43.1% voted for MEPs and in the Netherlands 39.1% while on the Constitution there was a 70% turnout in France and in the Netherlands 62%. It would seem that that French and Dutch voters are more enthusiastic about voting the EU down than voting for it. Is there a lesson there for Scottish and British parties that are members of the EU Supporters Club? Yours sincerely The party's over 02 12 04 Dear Editor (Greenock Telegraph) Can I make a few comments on your piece, 'The party's over', 25/11/04, about Iain Ramsay joining the Free Scotland Party after 51 years membership of the SNP. Free Scotland Party is delighted that Iain has joined up. Free Scotland will put Iain's long political experience to good use. I can tell you that leaving an organisation after such a long period of membership to join an opposing organisation is very difficult. This is not something that is done lightly or on a whim. I left the SNP after nearly 30 years membership and found it a traumatic experience. The SNP can ill afford to lose members of such long standing but it deserves too as it has lost it's way politically. Where is the logic in being in favour of Independence from one union, the UK, but in favour of membership of another even bigger union, the EU? The SNP appear to have settled down to devolution, have they also settled for devolution? There are rumours that the SNP are going to drop Independence like Plaid Cymru in Wales did. Come the General Election, Free Scotland will be standing in three constituencies as a launching pad for our campaign to be free of the UK and free of the EU. We want a three question referendum; on the EU constitution, the Euro and membership of the EU. Free Scotland would vote No to each question! Free Scotland (www.freescotlandparty.org) believe in a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland. Sounds good to me. Yours sincerely What Free Scotland is about 01 12 04 Dear Editor (SI) With regard to your piece on Jim Fairlie returning to party politics, SI November 2004, I wonder if you would allow me to clarify one point. The Free Scotland Party was described as 'a pro-Independence, anti-Europe organisation.' While we are happy to be described as pro-Independence, Free Scotland is not anti-Europe. We are, however, very much against the European Union. How can anyone support such a corrupt, bureaucratic, non democratic organisation? The EU has pretentions about becoming the United States of Europe while growing numbers of voters across Scotland and Europe are not prepared to support the EU any further. Come the General Election, Free Scotland will be standing in three constituencies as a launching pad for our campaign to be free of the UK and free of the EU. Free Scotland believe in a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland. Should sound familiar, it is what the SNP used to be about! Yours sincerely Keep the voters in the dark about the EU Project 02 10 04 Dear Editor (Herald) Last week
I attended a meeting in the Scottish Parliament on "A Vision of
Europe", organised by the Institute for Citizenship. It was an
attempt to take the debate to the country on the proposition that if
people knew more about the EU, opposition would lessen. Time constraints
made it inevitable that the debate itself was rather superficial but
if what was said during the course of the evening is indicative of the
type of debate we are likely to have, when the government finally decides
to put the question to the people of the UK, it does not auger well. Independence means what to the SNP? 22 09 04 Dear Editor (Herald) What do the SNP mean by Independence? Alex Orr was on the SNP EU candidates list in June so, presumably, he knows what he is talking about. In his letter, 22/09/04, he talks about pooling sovereignty as part of the SNP commitment to the European Union. Was the SNP not formed because Scotland lost out in the pooled sovereignty that was and is represented by membership of the UK? Pooled sovereignty works to the advantage of the bigger partners. Where is the logic in the SNP asking 5 million Scots to break away from a pooled sovereignty with 50 million in the UK but then ask the same 5 million Scots to participate in a pooled sovereignty with 400+ million in the EU. If SNP members actually want an Independence unfettered by involvement in the UK and an Independence unfettered by involvement in the European Union they need look no further than the Free Scotland Party (http://www.freescotlandparty.org). Yours sincerely Independence outwith the European Union 08 09 04 Dear Editor
(Herald) New SNP and New Independence 03
09 04 Independence in Europe slogan dropped? 18/08/04 Dear Editor Not one of the six contenders in the SNP leadership and deputy leadership contests has used the Independence in Europe slogan in the election material posted out to SNP members throughout Scotland. A remarkable omission, surely, or is this a sign of things to come?" Do the contenders agree that it is time to drop a slogan that has been costing the SNP votes at the ballot box and driven many members out of the party? All the candidates will be aware of a recent Rowntree Trust survey which showed that 73% of Scottish voters look favourably on the SNP. Yet most do not vote for the party, something that the SNP and the leadership election candidates should consider long and hard. One impediment to voting SNP is the Independence in Europe slogan. Voters in Scotland, as with voters across all of the EU, are becoming disenchanted with the EU; it is time for the SNP to detach Independence from this unpopular, bureaucratic and corrupt organisation. The SNP could with one bold policy switch drop Independence in Europe and reinvigorate disillusioned activists, making themselves relevant to voters who want Independence without the EU being tagged on. Roseanna Cunningham suggests that without independence Scotland cannot play 'a full and equal role in Europe'. That nonsense does not wash anymore with voters. They only have to look at the example of Scotland trapped in a common market in the UK for 300 years to see why Free Scotland (http://www.freescotlandparty.org) are after Independence. There is no logic in the SNP asking 5 million Scots to break away from a shared sovereignty with 50 million in the UK but at the same time ask the 5 million Scots to participate in a shared sovereignty with 400+ million in the EU. Yours sincerely Leadership muddle on Independence in Europe slogan 17 08 04 Dear Editor
(Scotsman) SNP Leadership contest 20 07 04 Dear Editor Scots Independent) A recent Rowntree Trust survey showed that 73% of Scottish voters look favourably on the SNP. Yet most do not vote for the party, something that the SNP and the leadership election candidates should consider long and hard. Mike Russell said that the contest should be about ideas and Alex Salmond said that he wanted Scotland to join the community of nations as an independent country but did not mention the European Union. One impediment to voting SNP is the Independence in Europe slogan. Voters in Scotland, as with voters across all of the EU, are becoming disenchanted with the EU; it is time for the SNP to detach Independence from this unpopular, bureaucratic and corrupt organisation. The SNP could elect a new leader and with one bold policy switch drop Independence in Europe and reinvigorate disillusioned activists and make themselves relevant again to voters who want Independence without the EU being tagged on. The SNP could re-adopt their former policy of gaining Independence and then letting voters in Scotland decide in a referendum on membership of the EU. Yours sincerely Open letter to SNP candidates in leadership election 16/07/04 Dear Alex, Roseanna, Mike I write to wish you every success in the SNP leadership contest. Mike Russell said that the contest should be about ideas and I noticed that Alex Salmond said that he wanted Scotland to join the community of nations as an independent country but not mentioning the European Union. I would suggest that one idea that should be considered is the dropping of the Independence in Europe slogan. Voters in Scotland are becoming increasingly disenchanted with the EU with anti EU parties, UKIP and the BNP, picking up 98,255 votes in Scotland at least some of whom would have voted SNP had it not been for Independence in Europe. Expressing enthusiasm for the EU does not sit well with trying to defend Scottish Fishing against the vagaries of the Common Fisheries Policy and taking a policy position on the EU Constitution, which frankly is baffling to most voters. Across all of the European Union anti EU parties picked up votes and seats signaling that disenchantment with the EU is not just a Scottish or British phenomenon. The EU has had its day and it is time for the SNP to detach itself and Independence from this unpopular, bureaucratic and corrupt organisation. John Swinney in his resignation speech talked about the Independence movement and the SNP in the same breath. They were the same at one time but, no longer, there are many parties offering voters the chance to vote for Independence. The SNP, the Scottish Socialists, the Scottish Greens, Scottish Independence Party, Scottish Enterprise Party and the Free Scotland Party all offer Independence. The SNP could elect a new leader and with one bold policy switch drop the failed Independence in Europe slogan and make themselves relevant again to voters who want Independence without the EU being tagged on. The SNP could adopt a policy of gaining Independence and then letting voters in Scotland decide in a referendum on membership of the EU. That used to be SNP policy and if adopted again could bring back lost members and voters, surely worth considering Yours sincerely Switch SNP policy to Independence 25/06/04 Dear Editor The SNP vote fell in the EU elections and leader, John Swinney has resigned. However, there is more to SNP failure than the leader. The SNP have the opportunity to have a good, hard look at their Independence in Europe slogan and they should grab this opportunity with both hands. John Swinney in his resignation speech talked about the Independence movement and the SNP in the same breath. They are not one and the same, they might have been at one time, but, no longer, there are many parties offering voters Independence. The SNP is a political party that supports Independence and further integration into the EU, thereby losing voters who are against the EU. The Scottish Socialists support Independence and socialism, thereby losing voters who are against that particular philosophy. The Scottish Greens support Independence and green issues, thereby losing voters who are against that particular philosophy. The Free Scotland Party support Independence and is the only Scottish political party advocating withdrawal from the EU. The SNP could elect a new leader and with one bold policy switch drop the failed Independence in Europe slogan and make themselves relevant again to voters who want Independence without the EU being tagged on. Why not have a policy of gaining Independence and then letting voters in Scotland decide in a referendum on membership of the EU? That should sound familiar to SNP members, it used to be SNP policy although many still think that it is. That policy was quietly dropped and the SNP have been losing members and percentage share ever since. Yours sincerely Gutted, Steadfast, Cod Crusaders 19/06/04 Dear Editor The BBC1 programme Gutted brought home just how inept the EU and the UK are and how awful decommissioning is. We all watched a perfectly good boat, the Steadfast, destroyed by a grasping bank and the insane CFP policy as applied in Scottish waters by the EU and their lackeys in London and Edinburgh. Where is the political support for Scottish Fishing? I suppose the BBC should be congratulated for showing a thought provoking programme, pity they did not have the bottle to show it during the elections to the EU parliament. The only people to come out of the programme with any credit were the Steadfast skipper and crew and the Cod Crusaders. Yours sincerely Europhobe/sceptic/creep, who wants to be a creep? 17/06/04 Dear Editor After confused and confusing European Union election campaigns, I read an article defining what Europhobe, Eurosceptic and Eurocreep mean. Europhobes want out of the EU, Eurosceptics want to change the EU from within and Eurocreeps want to carry on building towards the federal super state. The EU can not be changed from within, it is too big, too clumsy and too many people are making a good living out of it as it stands and the idea that it will get better as it get bigger and becomes the United States of Europe is laughable. The Free Scotland Party is Europhobe, wishes the sceptics well in their endeavours and wishes nothing but ill fortune to the creeps. Yours sincerely SNP policy vacuum 07/06/04 Dear Editor (Scotsman) Derrick Mclure, 6th June, asks, "Has the SNP got politicians of the calibre Scotland needs?" The answer is maybe yes, maybe no, however, what they do not have is the policies therefore not the appeal that will take Scotland forward to Independence. The SNP are so busy trying to make devolution work, for the UK and for their own short term political goals, that they no longer talk about Independence with any enthusiasm, if at all. What of the logic of the Independence in Europe slogan? Campaigning to get out of a 56 million union (UK) but also campaigning to stay in a 400+ million union (EU) makes no sense. In EU election campaign, the SNP have avoided talking about the institutionalised corruption of the EU, the undemocratic decision-making processes in the EU and the steady progress towards a federal super state. I wonder why? Yours Sincerely EU Elections: What EU elections? 25/05/04 Dear Editor The parties
contesting the EU elections are talking about anything other than the
real issues involved in the EU elections. Where is the talk of how to
deal with institutionalised corruption in the EU? What about the If the politicians who are in favour of EU membership can find nothing about the EU to enthuse about, perhaps it is because there is, in fact, nothing to enthuse about! In this EU election, New Labour are fighting the next domestic UK election doing nothing other than criticise the Tories on domestic UK issues. The Tories are talking about gaining power at the next domestic UK elections. The Liberal Democrats, the SNP and the SSP all want the EU election to be a referendum on Iraq. Such is
the level of this EU campaign that the most thought provoking issue
raised thus far is of a separate Scottish entry in the Eurovision Song
This is
an election in which politicians dare not speak about the real EU Yours Sincerely Eurosceptic 11/05/04 Dear Editor (Scotsman) Alasdair MacLean, 11/05/04, describes the Free Scotland Party (http://freescotlandparty.org) as eurosceptic. If wanting the best for Scotland is eurosceptic then so be it. Free Scotland want to be independent of the EU and independent of the UK, we want a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland. As independent countries Norway and Switzerland can pick and choose who to trade with and on what basis, Scotland has no such options. However, trapped in the EU we can watch our Fishing industry go the same way as our Steel industry, both sacrificed for the EU common good. As for Norwegian public opinion turning in favour of full membership, there must be another Norway somewhere. In the two public opinion surveys held in Norway that actually matter, the two referendums, the Norwegians have voted twice to stay independent. Free Scotland believe there should be a three question referendum when Mr Blar finally gets round to naming a date. There should be a question on the EU constitution, a question on the Euro and a third on membership of the EU. I am not sure if Alasdair misunderstands or is misrepresenting SNP policy on the EU. The SNP are full time members of the EU Supporters Club, they have no intention of withdrawing from the EU. A few years back the SNP dropped their policy of having a referendum on membership of the EU on attaining independence. They kept that policy change quiet and there are SNP members who have no idea that they are in a party totally committed to the EU. The SNP has been haemoriging members, rumoured in thousands since the turn of the year, their EU policy is another reason to leave them and join Free Scotland. Come June the 10th, I will have no Scottish party to vote for | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
