|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
13/06/08 Ireland rejects Lisbon Treaty 'The Lisbon Treaty has been dumped by the voters of Ireland when they voted No in a referendum yesterday,' said Brian Nugent spokesperson for the Free Scotand Party. He continued, 'the 27 member countries of the EU had to pass the Lisbon Treaty. Ireland held a referendum because of their constitution and is the only country in the 27 that was going to ask voters their opinion.' 'The EU Constitution and the Lisbon Treaty were all about further EU integration which when put to voters gets a No. The Dutch and French voted down the EU Constitution and the Irish have voted down the Lisbon Treaty. When will the EU realise that voters do not want the United States of Europe?' 'What subterfuge will the EU come up with next? The United States of Europe may be on hold but the gee-whizz bureaucarts in Brussels will come up with something. The rejected EU Constitution was repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty, what next other than do the decent thing and bow to the wishes of the voters?' 'The Irish No campaign argued that the Lisbon Treaty would open the door to interference in taxation and enshrine EU law above Irish law. An EU wide Foreign policy and an EU army were also issues.' 'Pause for thought for the political parties that support the EU?" 13/05/08 What is the SNP for anymore? The Free Scotland Party has launched a scathing attack on the SNP asking if the leadership of the SNP are too interested in power and running devolution for London to be nationalists. Brian Nugent, spokesperson for Free Scotland said, “the question has to be asked ‘What is the SNP for anymore?’ You used to vote SNP for Independence. Then you were asked to vote SNP for a referendum on Independence. But when Labour’s Wendy Alexander was offering the votes to get a referendum passed through the Scottish Parliament rather than biting Labour's hand off, the SNP decided to play hard to get.” “The Unionist parties are currently so inept that they are a gift but why give them three years to regroup? We can be sure that the UK government, Labour or Tory, will use this time to mess Scotland about. The SNP should have called Alexander and Labour's bluff. This was a golden opportunity missed.” “Independence is too important to be left to a party that does not know what it is for anymore.” “With the Lisbon Treaty being enforced, without voters being asked, the United States of Europe is coming soon to a country and continent near you! The EU is not democratic but the SNP want to hitch what was their major aim of Independence to a corrupt, bureaucratic, authoritarian, undemocratic organisation.” 29/04/07 Post Office closures, EU to blame 27/04/07 The Cost of the Union, Energy 26/04/07 The Cost of the Union, Agriculture 23/04/07 The Cost of the Union, Oil and Industry 23/04/07 Trade Union Secretary to stand in Free Scotland Party regional list 13/04/07 Free Scotland Party, Scottish Parliament elections, Manifesto Launch 11/04/07 London parties are the basket case 17/03/07 London subsidy junkies, Olympian incompetence 15/03/07 Trident vote: Scotland ignored 03/03/07 Scottish Parliamentary Campaign Launch 10/02/07 Bridge tolls vote; logic, fairness? 28/01/07 Brown hands off Scottish football 14/01/07 Treaty of Union, democratic deficit "The Treaty of Union was forced on the population of Scotland by the actions of the few in the then Scottish Parliament who represented not the people but the aristocracy, landowners and merchants", said Jim Fairlie, candidate for the Free Scotland Party in Perth. "We are getting very selective history trotted out as we approach the 300th anniversary of the passing of the Treaty of Union. The majority of Scots opposed the end of Scotland's independence but they were not represented in the Scottish Parliament. There was a huge democratic deficit. Only those of property had the right to vote for MPs who understandably represented the interests of the aristocracy, landowners and merchants and not the people." "England applied some very unsubtle pressure to the Scottish Parliament by passing the Aliens Act which laid down that Scottish landowners would have to forfeit their land in England, that Scottish merchants would not be allowed to trade in England and that there would be no trade between Scotland and English colonies." "Scottish MPs
responded to the self interest of their tiny electorate, and "300 years on and nothing has changed. Each of the Scottish electorate now has a vote and we can be against a war in Iraq but are dragged into it, Scotland can be against Trident but still have it situated in Scotland, can be against EU directives but have them forced on Scotland. There was a democratic deficit in 1707, there is still a democratic deficit in 2007." "It is time to get out of the unions of the UK and the EU. It is time for voters in Scotland to elect a government elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland." 05/11/06 Jim Fairlie to stand in Perth in 2007 Jim Fairlie will contest the Perth Constituency at the May 2007 elections for the Scottish Parliament for the Free Scotland Party. The candidate for Perth will be Jim Fairlie, who last contested the seat for the SNP in 1987, running second to Nicholas Fairbairn. Mr Fairlie, an ex deputy leader of the SNP, left the party in 1990 because of the SNP’s policy on the EU and was out of active party politics, until he joined the Free Scotland Party two years ago. Free Scotland was formed by long standing members of the SNP, together with other Nationalists, who want Scotland to be independent of the UK and the EU. Free Scotland have consistently argued that the SNP’s “Independence in Europe” is a contradiction in terms and the Scottish people are being lied to. Free Scotland argue Scotland can be independent or it can be a member of the EU, but it cannot be both. Mr Fairlie said, “Opinion polls have consistently shown over 50% of Scots favour independence and some very high profile Scots have recently added their weight to the argument. But only 30% of Scots are prepared to vote for the SNP and it has to be recognised that there are many Scots who support independence but will never vote for the party. There are also a great many Scots in every political party who reject the idea of further political and economic integration of the EU and a recent business survey showed a majority of business people in Scotland have given serious thought to leaving the EU.” Mr Fairlie continued, “Free Scotland offers Scots who favour independence from both the UK and the EU, a platform and a voice for the first time. We also offer a fresh start to those who have become sickened and disgusted by the duplicity of the Westminster parties have lied for over thirty years about the value of Scotland’s oil, Scottish regiments have carried a disproportionate burden and Scottish lives have been lost in Iraq, sent there on the basis of a pack of lies to fight an illegal war. Sleaze and corruption under New Labour is as bad if not worse than it was under the Tories and all the Westminster parties have debased politics and government. The SNP has consistently lied because it is not offering the Scottish people independence, it is offering another Union, where Scotland’s economy will be run from Brussels rather than London. The SNP has joined the other parties in the conspiracy of silence on the way in which the EU continues to encroach on our daily lives.” Mr Fairlie concluded, “Free Scotland is taking on the SNP in its heartland and will force them to debate and justify their slavish commitment to the EU, and their intention of swapping one incorporating union for another.” ENDS Jim Fairlie Political CV joined the SNP in
1955 aged 15 on joining Free Scotland in 2004, Jim Fairlie said, "Why join a party now? When I first left the SNP my intention was to take the arguments about the EU into the public domain, without having the restraints of party loyalty. I felt the debate was too important to be shelved because the SNP had decided to adopt its Independence in Europe line, and the SNP expected its senior members to adhere to the party policy. I hoped the SNP would change, as many members at that time insisted to me that it would." "I have always missed the involvement in political debate, hence my frequent but irregular appearances in the letter columns of the press. I went along as part of an invited audience to a debate in the Scottish Parliament, run by The Institute for Citizenship, on the question of the EU and the proposition that if people knew more about the EU, they would support it more. The panel included Alyn Smith SNP MEP and I have never seen someone elected on an SNP ticket so totally ignorant of the history of the SNP and so ill equipped to argue the case for Scottish Nationalism. I came away from the meeting seething with frustration and decided to become involved again." "I had hoped that in time, the SNP would present their case on the EU honestly but that possibility is further away than ever. The SNP has invested far too much political capital in Independence in Europe to change now. I believe that Free Scotland is the only political party in Scotland whose commitment to the restoration of Scottish sovereignty is unconditional therefore my only alternative if I want to be involved in nationalist politics again is the Free Scotland Party." "Free Scotland wants a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to the people of Scotland. This means that Free Scotland does not accept that a devolved parliament is enough, a position that some nationalist parties seem to be moving towards, and we do not accept interference from the European Union (EU) or the UK parliament in Scottish affairs." "Scottish solutions to Scottish problems is an oft heard refrain which cannot be achieved in the EU, in the UK or in a devolved parliament situation.”. 14/06/06 MP barking......up wrong tree on Post Office "So, Alistair Carmichael, MP for Orkney and Shetland, wants to ensure the viability of the rural Post Office network something that we can all agree with. However, a 90 minute debate in the Houses of Parliament misses the crucial point that the decisions about the Post Office are being made elsewhere", said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "The privatisation of the Post Office is being driven by the EU and much as Mr Carmichael may wish to talk to the minister responsible for the postal services that minister is only nominally responsible for postal services. Change to the Post Office at every level are happening because of EU directives." "EU directive 97/67/EC stated that items weighing more than 100 grams (small parcels upwards) were opened up to competition on January 1 2003, with private companies coming in to compete on the most lucrative parts of the market." "This year from January 1, 2006, the Royal Mail lost its monopoly when EU directive 2002/39/EC opened up the delivery of all items of more than 50 grams (roughly the weight of the average letter) to competition." "Encouraging competition is all fine and well but if the Post Office office has to deliver to every household in the land and private companies can pick and choose what to deliver then it is obvious that the competition is skewed towards the private companies." "With the Post Office's main avenue for making a profit crippled in this way, all the other services that the Post Office supplies then come under scrutiny and some will be lost." "Mr Carmichael support for rural Post Offices is welcome but the target for his ire should be the European Union but that would not sit well with the Liberal Democrat's enthusiastic support for the EU." 13/06/06 Half a million Strasbourg signatures, and counting "Half a million people across Europe have signed the petition asking for the closure of the second EU Parliament base in Strasbourg, France. The EU Parliament is normally based in Brussels but once a month decants to Strasbourg at a cost to the EU tax payer of €200 million a year." "One million signatures are required for the EU Parliament to discuss the closure of Strasbourg. They only meet in Strasbourg because France insists on it meeting there. Many see this as a French abuse of EU funds with the costs met primarily by the other member states. Strasbourg has not helped its case with allegations of inflated rents for the Strasbourg building." 31/05/06 Strasbourg Petition, http://www.oneseat.eu Brian Nugent, spokesperson
for the Free Scotland Party, has called for "Normally,
the EU Parliament meets in Brussels but once a month the EU "The costs are met primarily by the other member states. The cost of the EU Parliament in Strasbourg is estimated at over €200 million a year, these figures are based on 2004 figures, the latest figures are from before the union was enlarged with ten new member states in May 2004." "Apart
from the inconvenience and expense, Strasbourg itself has brought the
issue to the fore by charging extortionate rents, last month there were
"Now a number
of MEPs of various political parties from various countries "You are invited to surf to http://www.oneseat.eu and submit your signature. You could consider sending this address to all in your address book." 23/05/06 BA, 40%, competition "So, Tavish Scott, Scottish Government Transport Minister, is giving £11.2 million of tax payers money to British Airways (BA) and says this is a good deal. And, no doubt, BA agree. Pity that the Transport Minister has confused subsidising BA with subsidising islanders," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "British Airways announced profits on Friday which have soared in 2005-06 despite whopping increases in fuel costs, profits going up by 19.1 percent to a pre-tax profit of £620m in the 12 months ending 31 March." "What is needed is not a scheme to subsidise BA but a scheme which encourages competition on routes like Shetland. If this scheme is to continue then BA should be forced to open up their books for Island flights to see how they justify such high prices because even with a 40% reduction, islanders will still be paying top dollar." "What is needed is a scheme to encourage competition. A number of years ago, Business Air briefly flew in and out of Shetland at lower prices than BA. BA cynically undercut Business Air until they had to withdraw and then BA bumped up their prices again. Rather than subsidising BA, Globespan, Ryan Air or similar airline companies should be brought in and subsidised to compete against BA." "The fact that the scheme does not work, application forms did not go out properly, completed forms are still to be entered into the system, cards and pin numbers are not yet issued when the scheme is up and running, is a further slap in the face for islanders." 22/05/06 Montenegro, welcome to the World! "Montenegro, welcome to the World! All nationalists will be delighted for the Independence movement in Montenegro that they have got over the EU imposed hurdle of a 55% majority to regain their Independence and correct a wrong from 1918 when redrawing of maps after World War One led to the inclusion of Montenegro in Yugoslavia," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "The 55.4% majority is being described as narrow, why? The government in Italy changed with only a handful of votes to seperate both sides. Why was Montenegro different? Why should the EU have the right to interfere in the internal affairs of Montenegro or any other country?" "The EU should not be setting standards for Independence referendums especially when they would have had no idea what to do next if the majority had been less that their 55%." 13/05/06 EU Plan B for Montenegro? “What happens if result of the Montenegrin Independence Referendum is support for Independence but with a percentage that lands in that grey area between 50% to 55%, the EU imposed barrier? The majority will have lost! A crazy Alice in Wonderland system that only the EU could have come up with.” “In a volatile area there will the danger of internal instability between Serbia and Montenegro. What is the EU plan B for a mess of their own making? They can not walk away from a situation that they will have set up.” “Let us hope that May 21 sees the emergence of Montenegro as a fully Independent nation on the world stage and that Montenegro will say goodbye to a State Union dreamed up by the EU, despite the anti democratic rules put in place by the EU for this Independence Referendum.” “Montenegro is a multi-ethnic country which was wiped off the map by the Allies after World War 1, a country with a 1,000 year history was deemed not to exist. Montenegro with a population of 670,000, 41 percent Montenegrins, 30 percent Serbs, 14.7 per cent Bosniaks, 7 percent Albanians and one per cent Croats stood together while violence visited other parts of the former Yugoslavia.” “When Italy can change governments on a handful of votes, the EU has ordered that Montenegro has to get 55% in favour of Independence and that at least 50% of the voting population must vote. Why have higher democratic controls been set on Montenegro than would be set in an election anywhere else in Europe? Does the EU want Montenegro to fail and be stuck with Serbia?” “With such a divisive referendum, we can only hope that the OSCE and ODIHR foreign monitors are on top of their job and route out any fraud or suggestion of fraud as every vote will count.” “Montenegro deserves the support of nationalists and democrats everywhere. Montenegro has already declared that it will respect the historic and traditional links between the states of Montenegro and Serbia, and aims for a future alongside their neighbour based on ‘mutual respect, understanding, equality and friendship’.” “A long list of guarantees on behalf of the future State of Montenegro to citizens of Serbia includes all the human and civil rights and freedoms exercised by the citizens of Montenegro, property rights, rights to education, insurance, healthcare, pensions, ex-servicemen and disability protection rights, citizenship rights.” “How will Serbia react? Will they respect the majority in a grey area vote? Can Montenegro look forward to a Czech-Slovak velvet divorce? The EU will be responsible for this situation, they can not walk away.” 28/03/06 TEAM Conference (TEAM the European Alliance of EU-critical Movements) TEAM Conference, AGM weekend 31 March - 2 April 2006 in Vienna, Austria Opposition to the EU is growing across Europe with 35 participants from 19 countries attending this key event in Vienna. Among speakers will be Anthony Coughlan (National Platform, Ireland), Lave Broch (Peoples Movement against EU, Denmark), Normunds Grostins (Movement for Independence, Latvia), Kevin Bonice (Campaign for Independence, Malta), John Boyd (Campaign against Euro-federalism, United Kingdom). Discussion will
include the steps being taken by the EU and other vested Team are hoping
to encourage a public debate on the Constitution, the TEAM, The European
Alliance of EU-critical Movements 27/03/06 Pension rights strike support The Free Scotland Party backs local government workers in their strike on Tuesday (28/03/06) on pension rights. "Local government workers are right to make a stand on their pensions because if the government gets away with this first cut, it will only be the first of many. Why should they pay for the incompetence of politicians and Gordon Brown?" said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "We should be able to rely on MPs to sort out the pensions mess, but the only pensions they are interested in are their own. Most pension schemes deal with eigthieths, some sixtieths for years of service calculations, but the MPs voted themselves fiftieths. The reason given for this hike to the value of their future pensions is that an MP is effectively on a short term contract. That must sound a bit hollow to the many public and private sector workers who are on short term, low paid contracts with no pension perks." "You cannot rely on Chancellor Brown to sort out the pensions mess. Brown has provoked the pension crisis with a pernicious and lucrative stealth tax. Each year as Chancellor, he has removed the tax refund on share dividends which used to go to pension funds. In Brown's first year, this was worth £5billion, this year £7.3billion a year, and what would this (£50billion approximately) be worth over the 9 years had it been invested rather than burnt by Brown? All of this is lost to the pension industry and to you and me investors in the pension industry." "Black holes in pension funds are down to Brown, they are also down to private companies taking pension holidays in the good times and now in the bad times dumping their responsibilities to their employees by closing pension funds. There is no sign of any directors or chief executives taking a similar hit to their pension funds." "Current politicians have destroyed the pension industry and they will walk away in the same way that governments in the past Labour, Conservative and New Labour have all walked away from the state pension. The state pension in real terms is dropping in value and that is a matter of deliberate policy." " National Insurance Contributions (NIC) are taken off your wages and the theory was that this money would be invested partly to pay for the state pension and partly to invest, but in reality NIC is just another tax and is spent. NIC should be banked or invested to pay for the state pension, it should be invested in funds that potentially could increase in value over time instead of being just another black hole." 21/03/06 Margaret Ewing, MSP, RIP We mourn the passing of Margaret Ewing MSP who died from breast cancer on Tuesday, 21/03/06. A committed Nationalist who represented the SNP both at Westminster and in Edinburgh. Scotland has lost a champion. She will be sadly missed by all in the Independence movement. Our thoughts and prayers are with Fergus and family members. 21/03/06 Montenegro Independence Referendum, EU Interference “Is Montenegro to be held prisoner by the EU?” asked Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, “in the EU’s own words Montenegro is part of ‘manifestly dysfunctional confederation’, the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro that the EU helped bring about in 2001-2002. Montenegrins are entitled to campaign for Independence on their own terms but the EU, having manufactured the problem, appears to be trying to influence the outcome of the forthcoming referendum.” “The formula proposed by EU goes against the basic democratic principle that each vote should have the same value. In most democracies a majority means 50% plus one vote of those who vote. The EU has imposed two hurdles in the way of Montenegrin Independence; a 55% majority must vote for Independence and 50% of the electorate must vote on May 21. Where is the democracy in these two hurdles? Why has the EU selected Montenegro to apply these tests to a democratic referendum when these tests do not apply in any election or referendum in the states that make up the EU? Why the double standards?” “We were told that a one vote majority would be enough to take Britain into the Common Market in the 1975 referendum but it will take 55% in 2006 to take Montenegro out of the State Union. The worst possible scenario will be a majority for Independence but below the 55% mark, meaning the majority lose and the minority win. This stance runs contrary to the right of self-determination. Montenegro has been around as a self-conscious identity and nation for a thousand years, so if Montenegrins want to be independent again, why not? “The 50% of voters must vote is like a re-run of the 1979 Devolution referendum in Scotland and the Cunningham 40% amendment. The Cunningham amendment stated that at least 40% of those on the electoral register had to vote in favour for devolution to be accepted. This figure was almost impossible to get.” “The register was completed in October with the referendum held in March the following year. Electoral registers go out of date quickly. Voters move and do not register at their new home. Voters die. With the 40% rule, the dead and all those who abstained effectively became No voters in the Devolution referendum.” “Another anomaly is that students can be registered to vote in two places, their home address and their university address. If a student voted at one or the other and voted yes, that vote was cancelled out by not voting in the other area because of the Cunningham amendment. If they voted no, they had two no votes in effect.” “Scotland voted in favour of devolution by 52% to 48% but the majority equated to 32.9% of the electorate so the majority were denied what they wanted and lost, the minority won.” “If as the EU says Montenegro has taken major steps to earn the right to make its own decision free of outside pressure, why has the EU applied it’s own outside pressure to Montenegro with not one but two unusual voting stipulations?” “It is almost as if there is a secret EU agenda to keep the State Union together. The EU are, at least tacitly, encouraging the anti-independence opposition, indirectly stimulating the opposition to boycott any referendum meaning the majority would not matter. What are the EU’s motives? Are they trying to avoid another Balkan state that will demand EU aid and expect a separate seat at EU negotiations?” “What right does the EU have to interfere in a country? What happens in a referendum in Montenegro may seem far away but in the event of any future Independence referendum in Scotland or Catalonia or the Basque country or wherever else in Europe, the EU may want to interfere there too. The EU is setting a precedent that should not become a template for Independence referendums. Democratic rules as applied elsewhere should apply to independence referendums.” “You have to admire the cheek of EU given that the EU is itself not democratic. What you can not admire is the blackmail used against the Montenegrin independence movement. The EU threatened to withhold international observers from the referendum if the 55% rule were not accepted. International observers give legitimacy to any election result if they find it fair.” “Miroslav Lajcak, the EU's envoy to the region said rather menacingly, ‘I don't believe that the Montenegro government would choose to step into contradiction with the EU over this issue’. The EU’s use of blackmail and threats shows how corrupt the whole organisation is and one best avoided in the future by an Independent Montenegro.” “Finally, Scot Sir Fitzroy Maclean who parachuted into German-occupied Montenegro in 1943 said of Montenegro ‘If I were ever to be reborn, outside of Scotland, I would like to be born in Montenegro and to be protected in my direst hours by Montenegrins’. Along with that recommendation, the Free Scotland Party wishes Montenegro well in its quest to overcome the EU’s hurdles and become Independent.” Sources http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/pdfs/20060304/D22.pdf 23/02/06 Free Scotland Party to join TEAM, the european alliance of EU critical movements TEAM, the european
alliance of EU critical movements, is considering an Brian Nugent, spokesperson
for the Free Scotland Party, said, "the Free TEAM is a information
sharing network bringing together 57 EU-critical The organisation was set up in 1992 to defend democracy against the emerging EU State and against the ongoing erosion of democracy in the EU. TEAM's common beliefs
are in the principles of democracy requiring John Boyd, Team
co-ordinator, said, "The building of a centralised "The centralisation of more and more power to Brussels and Frankfurt removes decision-making and control from national governments and parliaments, which are democratically accountable to their voters and citizens, to bureaucrats and politicians at EU-level, who decide policy package deals among themselves behind closed doors." "The project
of an EU Superstate is being pressed by the euro-federalists Brian Nugent added,
"Free Scotland believe that we all owe a debt of http://www.teameurope.info/
John Boyd, TEAM
Coordinator 08/02/06 Aaland, to leave EU? The island Aaland, recent competitors in Shetland in the Island Games, is threatening to leave the EU unless it is allowed to make its own policy decisions on the tax-free sale of snuff in their own territorial waters. Aaland is a small semi-autonomous island but becoming part of Finland in 1921 it maintained its Swedish language and culture and kept self-governance over internal matters like education, culture, healthcare, post and police matters, while foreign policy, customs and monetary matters are handled from Helsinki. When Finland joined the EU in 1996, Aaland agreed to join on condition that it could keep some of its crucial laws, such as keeping Swedish as the only official language, and having complete demilitarisation of the island. The ferry-sale of Swedish style tobacco called "snus", a brown moist powder that users shape into a wad and stick under their upper lip, is a major source of income for the island. An EU ban on moist snuff applies to the whole EU bloc except Sweden, which has claimed that the use of snus is part of the Swedish traditional heritage. Swedish-speaking Aaland declared that the cultural and historical bond to Sweden should make the island state eligible for the same exception to the rule. Another important aspect of this issue is that Aaland regards the waters surrounding the island as their own, not part of EU waters, which should allow for tax-free sales on passenger ferries from neighbouring countries in Aaland waters. Finnish users have to travel by ferry to either Aaland or Sweden to fill up on personal stocks. Much to the annoyance of Aallanders, the Finnish government has announced that it will side with the EU on this matter. This comes on top of a number of EU bans affecting Aaland this year such as a recent hunting ban. Britt Lundberg of Aaland's government explained that Aaland could not support a European treaty without even having a say in matters concerning the island's own interior politics. Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, commented, "the EU is interfering in every aspect of life across every community, trampling everyone and everything underfoot that disagrees with its policies. No one signed up for the micro management of their life." 31/01/06 EU propaganda unit "Legitimate press coverage or propaganda paid for by tax payers that is the question to ask with news that a 'white paper on communication' is to be unveiled on Wednesday (1 February) by the EU," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "One of the proposals is to create an EU press agency to join the existing 24-hour TV news channel Euronews, currently funded by both the Commission and the European Parliament." "The EU seem to find it difficult to accept that voters when asked are likely to vote down EU proposals such as the French and Dutch voters rejecting the Constitution. They are involved in a "reflection period" after the rejection of the Constitution, and it would appear that they feel that voters are to blame for being misinformed or under informed about the Constitution, the project and elitist EU institutions. Blame the voters would seem to be the approach." "The Commission argues this debate should be 'inclusive', with all citizens having access to information. Presumably, press coverage will cover EU corruption, Commissioners, MEPs and civil servants on the gravy train, rampant bureaucracy, lack of democracy in EU institutions and the fact that EU accounts have not been signed off for 11 years or then again, maybe not." "Another worrying proposal is that better awareness of Europe could also be achieved by lessons in EU history and institutions being part of the school day. Brainwashing children is not on!" 30/01/06 Scotland v Faroe Islands in Shetland The Free Scotland Party is writing to the Scottish Football Association suggesting that Shetland play host to the Scotland v Faroe Islands match in the 2008 Euro qualifying competition. "The SFA should take the opportunity thrown up by the 2008 Euro draw which sees Scotland and the Faroe Islands in the same group to award the Scotland home match against the Faroes to Shetland. The SFA should be promoting football throughout Scotland and moving this international to Shetland would be a great reward for the dedicated football followers in the islands", says Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "Shetland did
a wonderful job of organising the Island Games in July of 2005 with
football being one of the major sports. The Shetland Football "Apart from
the experience of organising football competitions, Shetland 16/01/06 Brown's Britishness bellow bombs "Great Britain,
what is great about being British? They had a fine sense of "Scotland
does get to supply all our resources to maintain Britain. "Despite a Treaty of Union that stated that there would not be different tax systems in different parts of the union, the Poll Tax experiment was imposed in Scotland. Scotland has had its Steel and Fishing industries sacrificed, Steel by Mrs Thatcher when the EU needed a cut in production and Fishing with an ongoing death by a thousand cuts with the major fishing effort in Scotland but our fishermen represented in EU negotiations by a British Minister." "Why
did Mr Brown not speak out when England stole 6,000 square miles of
Scotland's coastal waters in the North Sea? What of a London centric
"Everyone
suspects that Gordon Brown is trying to sell out to England's 27/12/05 Free Scotland join SCAEF SCAEF, the Scottish Campaign against Euro-Federalism, have welcomed the Free Scotland as their newest group member. Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, said "Free Scotland are delighted to be members of SCAEF and believe that as more and more voters in Scotland become disillusioned with the EU and they need organisations such as SCAEF and Free Scotland to support." "Free Free Scotland wants an Independent Scotland, Independent of the UK and Independent of the EU!" "Free Scotland says hold a 2 question referendum, Question 1 on the Euro, Question 2 on membership of the European Union (EU). Free Scotland says vote No both to the Euro and to membership of the EU." "Free Scotland support any referendum or measures to diminish the powers of the EU over Scottish Life." The Scottish Campaign against Euro-Federalism is the Scottish affiliate of CAEF. (CAEF is the UK Campaign against Euro-Federalism.) Formed in 1992, the Campaign against Euro-Federalism campaigns against the growing centralization of the EU, its increasing use as a vehicle for enforcing directives on privatization and competition and its erosion of the democratic powers of parliaments in member states. The Scottish Campaign was established in 1996. Today its members include trades councils, trade unions, political parties and individuals. It is chaired by Eddie Maguire, Chair of the Musicians Union in Scotland. Its two honorary presidents are Alex Falconer and Alex Smith. SCAEF is currently working with other groups on the Left to campaign against Services Directives and any attempt to resurrect the 2004 EU Constitution in new forms. CAEF's statement of aims stresses: · The rights of states to self-determination, the only true internationalism · Anti-imperialism - for independence, peace, democracy; against racism · Democracy - the needs of the labour and trade union movement and people whom these organisations normally represent, including democrats, socialist, trade unionists, students and pensioners SCAEF exists to promote awareness of the dangers posed by the EU to democracy and the economic and social rights of working people in Scotland. It has organised conferences, debates and fringe meetings at trade union gatherings. SCAEF, Scottish
Campaign against Euro-Federalism web site "Being part of the EU costs Scotland money, being part of the UK costs Scotland money," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. 21/12/05 EU, UK costs Scotland money and jobs "Being part of the EU costs Scotland money, being part of the UK costs Scotland money," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "being members of a club you have to pay your dues and the EU is not cheap but with the reduction in the British rebate from the EU being members just got dearer. One billion pounds dearer and paying more into the EU means that the British tax base has to be increased, higher taxes, to maintain current levels of spending or that current levels of services must be cut. The one billion will have to be found from somewhere, either in increased taxes or cuts to services." "The EU costs Scotland money in implementing EU regulations and policing them. Many of these EU regulations have added huge costs onto businesses which threaten the viability of the businesses. Slaughterhouses are knee deep in EU regulation and many have closed due to the burden. Businesses which use high amounts of water in their processes are complaining bitterly about the burden of EU regulation. Fishermen are being ground down by EU regulation." "While businesses close or struggle by, lawyers and some administrators are making a good living out of making the EU regulations work often to the detriment of fellow Scots workers. There is the problem that when Scots factories close we have to import material, food for example, and that food may have been produced in unregulated circumstances. So Scots lose jobs and replace home production with questionable material produced in questionable ways." "But the cry goes that EU funds are helping this project and that project which they are but the EU does not have funds to distribute. The EU gets its money from member states and the member states get the money from tax payers. EU funded projects are the EU giving Scotland back some of its money, and spiriting the rest away to feed the EU machine." "Being part of the UK also costs Scotland money. Gordon Brown, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, has raised tax on profits in the North Sea oil fields from 10% to 20% and is looking to make £2.3 billion pounds a year. Shell have already announced a cut back in exploration costing jobs in Scotland. You only need to look over the North Sea to Norway to see how a small, independent country can secure its future on the back of oil. They have built up Statoil and huge funds over the years meanwhile Scotland is the only country in the world to discover oil and get poorer." 01/12/05 Support St Andrews Day holiday WEDNESDAY was St Andrews Day and how did you celebrate Scotland's national day? Probably like most Scots the day passed you by. Scotland does not celebrate its own existence, unlike just about every country in the world, including our neighbours in the North Sea. The Norwegians celebrate Constitution Day on 17 May as their national holiday, Iceland have their Independence Day on 17 June while the Faroe Islands celebrate Olavasoka on 29 July. So why is Scotland different? Dennis Canavan, Independent MSP, has put forward a bill in the Scottish Parliament to celebrate St Andrews Day as a national holiday. Hardly a radical proposal you would have thought but the best that First Minister Jack McConnell can come up with is that he had "yet to be convinced" by the merits of the idea. The denial of a case for a national holiday is one aspect of a political problem for the Unionist parties, having admitted that Scotland exists by setting up a devolved parliament, how do they keep a lid on the bottle of Scottish ambition. Unionist politicians are always looking over their shoulders to Westminster to work out what will be acceptable to their political masters, they know their careers depend on it. Politicians in Scotland should represent Scottish interests and not the interests of another country. Labour ran Scotland as their personal fiefdom from the 50s onwards. They were not interested in promoting Scotland among its own population. All Labour wanted and needed was subservient Labour voters at election time. The lack of a St Andrews Day holiday is but a straw in the wind. Why do 500 members of the Literature Forum for Scotland feel the need to send a petition to the Scottish Parliament to ask that Scottish literature, history and language are taught in Scottish schools? Obviously, they feel that it is not happening currently and that is remarkable. Peter Peacock, education minister, was suggesting last month that the teaching of history be removed from the curriculum completely. Is there any other country in the world that goes out of its way not to teach its literature, history and language? The Labour establishment in Scotland in charge of the school curriculum did just that, trying to eradicate any aspect of Scottish life, culture, history from the curriculum, a subtle form of ethnic cleansing. Don't take my word for it, ask the Literature Forum for Scotland. Learning about your own area and country gives you a grounding to be able to appreciate and understand other countries and cultures. Scotland's problem is that we are in bed with an elephant, England, and that we have to keep selling our own country short for our bigger neighbour and be thankful for getting the odd crumb. Good luck to London on getting the Olympics but let us not pretend that this is a British event, it is an English event pure and simple. The offer of a football game at Hampden and some rowing at Strathclyde Park smacks of nothing more than beads for the natives. Scotland is being patronised but we will get the opportunity to partly fund the games by Scottish sports funding being cut. The response of some to the Scottish Football Association's refusal to be part of a UK football team in the Olympics beggars belief. To some extent the Scottish football team has kept the name of Scotland in people's minds the world over. There is considerable pressure on FIFA to merge the UK football teams into one. If Scotland were to join a merged football team for the Olympics that would be like the proverbial turkey voting for Christmas. Scotland should not be asked to lay down and die at every opportunity but should take every opportunity to promote itself on the world stage. Why the hysterical response to asking that a Scottish team go to the Olympics? A painless campaign to support surely at www.c-scot.org/SupporttheCampaign.htm but no, Unionist politicians were tripping over themselves to condemn such a move. If Hong Kong can go to the Olympics, why not Scotland? Unionist politicians are trying to ride two horses at the one time, they are bound to fall off. It is a perverse career indeed that makes them want to denigrate Scotland, and argue against even the simplest acknowledgement that Scotland exists and to do it with such gusto. 16/11/05 Disproportionate Scots war losses "The
Scottish Parliament should demand the right to determine how many Mr Fairlie
continued, "At a time when the memories of those who died in the
wars of the last century, are fresh in the minds of their relatives
and "Instead of
campaigning to save the Scottish regiments, MSPs should be "Scotland provided 25% of the troops in the first Iraq war and when I asked Lord Clyde why this should be, he replied, "It was their turn." A closer look at Scotland's military history shows that it is always Scotland's "turn". In WWI, 27% of Scottish troops mobilised were killed, as opposed to 12% for British forces overall. In WWII, Scots dead were a third of the UK total and in Korea it was 25%. Casualty lists like that do not happen by accident." Mr Fairlie concluded,
"It took many years after the events to find out the 15/11/05 11 in a row! EU accounts not get signed off, again! "The EU has failed yet again to get its auditors to accept its accounts. Would you want to be a member of a social club that failed to get its accounts passed by its auditors?" asked Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "It is not just that the European Court of Auditors have refused to sign off the EU’s accounts that is astonishing but that they have refused to sign the accounts off for the eleventh year in a row." "Who would join a social club on this basis? No one, and yet we all get the chance to pay tax to an organisation with a £68 billion budget that is corrupt to the hilt. Fraud is rife within the EU." "There are people, being paid fancy salaries, responsible in the European Commission for beating corruption, the auditors have just told them that they are failing miserably. On an EU wish list there probably is a wish to eradicate corruption but where is the the political will?" "The Court of Auditors say that 90 per cent of the £68 billion EU budget is open to fraud with "structural weaknesses" in accounting procedures and that internal policies "do not provide sufficient assurance as regards the legality and regularity of payments." The European Court of Auditors issued its Annual Financial Report on the European Union’s 2004 accounts on November 14." 07/11/05 Free Scotland Party welcomes public launch of Independence Convention The Free Scotland Party today welcomed the announcement of the public launch of the Independence Convention on St Andrews Day by the Interim Forum for an Independence Convention. Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, said, “Free Scotland is delighted that the Independence Convention will be going public after a lot of hard work in the background by representatives of political parties, including Free Scotland, and others.” “St Andrews Day is the perfect day for the launch of the Independence Convention which we can all hope will rival the success of the Scottish Constitutional Convention in achieving it aim.” “The major fault with the Scottish Constitutional Convention was that it set limits on the ambitions on voters in Scotland. Why stop at devolution? The aim of the Independence Convention is to give voters the opportunity to answer the question about Independence that should have been asked along with the others in the devolution referendum.” “The Independence Convention will give normally fractious political parties the chance to work together towards a shared, common goal along with members of Scotland’s civic society. Let us hope that the aim is more important than any perceived self interest.” “Free Scotland agrees wholeheartedly with the Independence Convention that Scotland is a nation and is as entitled as any other to self-determination. Free Scotland look forward to the day that voters in Scotland become confident enough to see past all the Unionist misinformation for a majority to vote for Scotland to become an independent country.” For more information, visit http://www.independenceconvention.org/ 21/09/05 Scottish Pound, Scottish Central Bank, policy launch, Free Scotland Party Jim Fairlie, Free Scotland Party economics spokesperson, today (Wednesday) launched the Free Scotland policy calling for the setting up of a Scottish Pound and a Scottish Central bank. He said,"Parties that promote an Independent Scotland need to know where they stand with regard to the running of the Scottish economy after independence. Too many of the parties have woolly or vague position while the SNP are confusing fiscal autonomy with the running of the economy." He said, "Fiscal
policy is the raising of taxes, income, VAT, customs and "If, at the
same time, the Scottish Central Bank allowed interest rates to "The euro zone means those member states control raising revenues, fiscal policy, but the ECB, European Central Bank, controls monetary policy, interest rates. Despite pleas especially by Germany, France and Italy, to reduce interest rates, the ECB continues to apply rates which do not suit the economies of the three biggest economies in the euro zone." "The interest
rates applied to the UK rarely suit Scottish economic "The same applies
in the USA, despite the size of the country and the "The SNP tries
to argue for fiscal autonomy as the final step to "Thus,
fiscal autonomy does not give any country control of its economy, nor
does it mean independence. Free Scotland argues that to be truly "Free Scotland says establish a Scottish Central Bank with a Scottish Pound to control the Scottish economy. The other political parties all want either the Bank of England to control monetary policy, or the ECB, and that is why Free Scotland's position is unique among all the other parties who claim to want Scottish independence. If the UK insists that monetary policy should be controlled by the Bank of England, it is perfectly consistent for a party which wants Scotland to be independent to argue that monetary policy must be controlled from Edinburgh." 19/09/05 Scottish Politicians: Power without responsibility "Tavish Scott, the Transport Minister in the Scottish Parliament, says Cal Mac must tender because of EU law. What EU law would be? And when were voters in Scotland, never mind Britain, asked to vote on the ascendancy of EU law?" said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for Free Scotland. "Voters are asked to vote on MEPs who do not have law making powers so where is the democracy in the EU? The EU Commission sends down law from on high, people on whom voters have no selection or more importantly deselection rights. Scottish politicians at Holyrood or in Westminster can do no more than wring their hands in frustration." "How
does the EU get away with it and why are Scottish politicians not "The
major problem is an abdication of responsibility by Scottish "The Free Scotland party would argue that only politicians elected by others in Scotland should make decisions about Scotland in Scotland, Westminster and Brussels should have no input on Scottish Life." 12 09 05 SI (Scots Independent) article - Free Trade Faced with the same problems, would the government of an independent Scotland have reacted any differently? The answer, to some extent, would depend on whether or not Scotland was a member of the EU. The problems of course, are those associated with the ability of the Chinese to outsell just about every other country in the world, when it comes to retail clothing, and shortly any number of other goods and services. The imposition of embargoes on goods from countries from outwith the EU, does not auger well for the liberalisation of world trade, of particular significance for developing nations. While lip service is paid to the concept of “free trade”, between the EU and countries which are not members of the club, the rules which are applied between member states, tend to be more rigidly adhered to; witness the loss of the fishery protection vessels to a Polish yard. OK, OK, it was the Executive’s fault, they could have “interpreted the rules differently”, as one Nationalist spokesman put it. But what kind of system is it, that for it to work, the rules have to be interpreted according to the prevailing political wind in the member states? The question of protection of domestic companies and markets is a serious one, and one that is better to be decided in Edinburgh than in Brussels. Would an independent Scotland seek to impose quotas on Chinese goods, in order to protect Scottish textile companies, or any other manufacturing companies? Or would the government of an independent Scotland recognise that Chinese costs of production will always undercut those in Scotland, for the manufacture of run of the mill goods; and that as a quid pro quo, we would be looking for entry into the vast Chinese market for the kind of luxury goods that we can produce better than most? As China, India and South East Asia develop, the kind of situation currently facing the member states of the EU will only get worse. But the answer is not quotas. The only realistic answer is to increase the skill levels of the Scottish workforce and compete where the value added is the greatest. A small country has much more to gain, by not being part of a large trading bloc, intent on creating a fortress built on trade protection. Could that attitude be adopted across the board and for every industry? Is there any argument worth making, other than the social consequences, of not allowing a ship builder like Ferguson to go to the wall? Yes there is and it is the same argument, as the one for other manufacturing products. A country with the history for manufacturing innovation and shipbuilding skills, such as Scotland, would be extremely foolish to allow those skills to disappear completely, particularly in a country, which has an offshore oil industry as important to the economy as ours. Then there is agriculture. The problems facing agriculture are several and varied, but not least among them is the part played by supermarkets. Ironically enough, if it were not for the CAP, a substantial number of farmers in Scotland would not be in business. The farmers’ market movement is just getting off the ground and after the original was started in Perth about six years ago, there are now about 50, which operate regularly every month. However, the burden of regulation on health and quality control, is in danger of killing the movement before it has a chance to make a real impact. Over regulation is making it very expensive for slaughter houses to operate and at the same time, allow farmers to compete with the prices being charged by supermarkets, which are free to sell imported meat, not subject to the same regulations. The public has shown it is prepared to pay more for food, providing it can be sure of getting quality. Can, or should, any country watch its agricultural industry being destroyed by unfair competition? Or, should we be looking at devising a system whereby farm subsidies are stopped and farmers are forced to compete with each other, for markets, which are guaranteed to take local produce. For example, free school milk and free school lunches using local produce, would answer critics of the present fare being dished up to school children and at the same time, force farmers to operate on a more business like basis. Add to that, the meat and produce served to the forces and there is a substantial market available, for those prepared to go out to capture it. There is no such thing as free trade, any more than there is such a thing as a free lunch. Unless it has its priorities right, an independent Scotland would find that out very quickly. 12 08 05 SI (Scots Independent) article - Ethnicity I am well aware this is a touchy subject and I expect a few knee-jerk reactions, but when it comes to nation building, there are a number of touchy subjects which have to be broached and this is only one of them. In the aftermath of the London bombings, Tony Blair announced that the rules of the game had changed. By that he meant that Islamic fundamentalists, so-called hate preachers, and those whose loyalties to Britain were suspect, would no longer be tolerated. Blair’s targets, almost by definition, fell within a narrow range and I can think of no good reason why any country would want to give house room to such odious creatures as the like of Abu Qatada, a fugitive from his native Jordan, and Omar Bakri Mohammad, wanted for questioning in both Syria and Saudi Arabia for his membership of extremist Islamic groups. However, the public reaction in some parts of the UK has been to be rather more general in targeting those it considers “suspect”. Norman Tebbit’s famous/notorious “cricket test” is now being applied. The self-styled liberal elite have had it their own way for too long, demanding that all faiths, all cultures must be given equal standing and in some cases, superior status over the native British culture, whatever that is. No matter how many generations of immigrants have lived and been born in the UK, they are still deemed to belong to that ever increasing group called “ethnic minorities”. More importantly, the “ethnic minorities” insist on remaining “ethnic minorities”, encouraged by those who see multiculturalism as the epitome of a civilised society. Until now, no one who could make a difference, has stopped to ask, “At what point do the ethnic minorities become just British?” In our attempt to rebuild a Scottish nation state, do we have anything to learn from the mistakes of the past. As Nationalists, the notion of “Britain” is anathema to us but I think we can look forward to the establishment, in both Westminster and Holyrood, making every effort to persuade us that although we live in the greatest little country in the world, we are really only a part of a much bigger whole. It is not that Scotland has been free of the same kind of mistakes that have been more recently made in other parts of the UK. Sectarianism is still a running sore in the West Central Belt, although it has improved greatly from the gaping wound it once was. I had my baptism of fire at a very early age, seven years of age to be exact. The winter of 1947 was the worst in living memory and we had moved to a new house, about two and a half miles from my school. My father was a Protestant, who had been disowned by his family for marrying a Catholic and I attended the only Catholic school in Perth. I was repeatedly refused passage on the service bus, on the grounds there was a school bus that I could take. There was no school bus because there were only three of us going to the Catholic school. During one of the worst snow storms of the winter, I had been turned away from the service bus three times when my father rose from his sick bed and insisted I get on the next one. The crew took me round a bend in the road about two hundred yards from the house and put me off again, to the applause of a section of the passengers. I had no idea what a wee Fenian bastard was, but apparently I was one. I am still the only Catholic ever recruited into Perth City Police, a force that disappeared with regionalisation in the 1970s. What followed was two years of relentless sectarian abuse,, culminating in my sacking a mere two hours before my probation ended, on the grounds of “lack of education.” There was no right of appeal but for attempting to fight back, I was blacklisted, failing in other applications to some of the most under-strength forces in the UK, without ever being told why. As a devout atheist, I hate sectarianism and the SNP can take an enormous amount of credit for the fact that Nationalism in Scotland has never been sullied by either racism or sectarianism. Neither race nor religion was ever an issue in the party and I had no idea what religion, if any, was practised by the many colleagues and friends I had in the party, until the Orange Lodge decided to publish the names of prominent members of the SNP who were Catholics. I had long ceased to be even a nominal Catholic but my name was there with the rest, a wee bit like original sin. I mention all of this because calls have been made from a number of quarters, including the SNP, for immigrants to be directed to Scotland. The current fashion is to believe Scotland needs immigrants in substantial numbers, in order to achieve the required levels of economic growth to sustain our position as one of the slowest growing economies in Europe. The jury is still out on that one but if we are to attract immigrants, let us make sure they realise they are coming to Scotland and not something the establishment will insist on calling Britain. Nationalism in Scotland has failed to make a lasting impact in the West Central Belt and part of that failure can be laid at the door of the history of the last large immigrant group to come to Scotland – the Irish. Unfortunately we do not see many Saltires at either Ibrox or Parkhead. Perhaps the last word should be left to Cardinal Keith O’Brian, who said, “As a society we must be greater than the sum of our parts. We should respect and value our fellow citizens’ cultural and religious identities yet at the same time, share with them a bigger common national identity." 19/07/05 Cal Mac: So, who rules the waves? “Who do politicians answer to”, asked Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party. “Is it their electors or an unelected cabal in Brussels?” “The Free Scotland party would argue that the politicians elected by voters in Scotland should make decisions about Scotland in Scotland, the politicians in the Scottish Parliament are answerable to Scottish voters, bureaucrats in Brussels are answerable to no one and should cut out of the decision making loop.” “The Scottish Parliament voted to put an end to Caledonian MacBrayne having to tender for the West Coast routes. Yet the Scottish Executive Transport Minister, Tavish Scott has to meet with the EU's Transport Commissioner, Jacques Barot to find out what the EU is going to allow him to do next.” “Mr Scott has his instructions from the Scottish parliament, he should get on with it but he says he has to consider the MSPs' views and the EU's position before presenting his findings to parliament.” “The previous Transport Minister, Nicol Stephen, argued at the time of the vote that the executive had no alternative but to obey the European Commission's legislation. EU interference is unacceptable but even worse is the acceptance by politicians of EU interference.” 19/07/05 Fishing Betrayal: Edward Heath Commenting on news of the death of former Prime Minster Edward Heath, Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party said, “Edward Heath is the man who led the UK into the EEC. He was so determined to get in that when a French translation of the recently passed Common Fisheries Policy came into the UK’s delegation’s hands they did not bother to get a translation.” “Fishing for Mr Heath was a non issue; he should never be forgiven for this dereliction of duty. Fishermen and fishing communities have suffered since. Quite how the Tories, in recent elections, have had the cheek to promote themselves as being pro fisheries is beyond me.” 12 07 05 SI (Scots Independent) article - EU, Single currency The demise of the EU Constitution is not the only problem facing the EU. The other is the prospects for the Euro zone and the survival of the single currency. That is not wishful thinking on my part. Unemployment in Germany is at its highest level since the 1930s, standing at 12.5% or over 5 million people. The hardest hit areas are those in the old East German state, despite an estimated 1.25 trillion euros in transfer payments, made since unification. The unification process has been of such import as to cause the German government to plead exceptional conditions, to allow Germany to continue to flout the rules of the Growth and Stability Pact. There are no exceptional conditions, which would allow France to do the same, but she will continue to flout the rules nevertheless as unemployment remains stubbornly over 10%. The economic problems in Italy have provoked an outcry in that country and a demand in some quarters for a return to the Lire. Germans increasingly blame the euro for the inflation they claim to be suffering, as opposed to the official government figures and when the same pattern is being repeated in the Netherlands, France and Ireland, it cannot be dismissed as mere euro scepticism. The lessons of making transfer payments in Germany, should certainly be taken on board because of the transfers which are needed to ease the passage of the new member states. Problems of immigrant labour to the older members are already causing unease, which is not going to disappear of without being addressed. What lessons do these problems hold for Scotland and the prospects for independence? I have long been an opponent of the single currency because no country can be independent if monetary policy is controlled outwith its own borders. The euro cannot be a success without much stricter control of taxation, which knocks on the head any notion of fiscal autonomy, and if both monetary and fiscal policy is determined outwith the borders of a country, the pretence of being independent looks pretty threadbare. If currency unions are such a good idea, why are there not more of them? The Scandinavian currency union was formed in 1873 and wound up in 1918. Norway is not in the EU and neither the Danes nor the Swedes have seen fit to join the euro, nor are they likely to. At the same time, currency crises are not unknown. In 1992-93 it was the European Monetary System; in 1994-95 it was the Mexican peso crisis and in July 1997 it was the Asian financial crisis. They were not all caused by the same factors but they all had an enormous effect on the financial systems of the countries involved. It has been the received wisdom for some time that because of the globalisation of the world economy and the capital flows, which this has encouraged, currency stability can only be achieved when countries act together. But is this necessarily the case? The rigidities imposed by the Exchange Rate Mechanism, forced the UK to withdraw in September 1992, to loud condemnation from its EU partners and Tory critics at home. The entire system had collapsed within eighteen months. The US recession of 1990-91 caused massive outflows of capital to Asian countries, which had pegged their currencies to the US dollar but much of the capital found its way into property speculation and equities, rather than domestic demand. By 1997, the currencies were grossly overvalued and devaluation in Thailand was swiftly followed by the same in Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore and finally Hong Kong. So, are countries better to control their own currencies and decide whether or not to peg to, or track another currency. I would argue yes, but their international trading patterns cannot be ignored. In January 2002, 1 US dollar was worth almost 9 Norwegian Krone, by July 2002 it was worth only 7.3 Krone and last month it was worth 6.58 Krone. The high price of oil obviously affects Norwegian currency values because only Russia and Saudi Arabia export more oil than Norway and while a strong currency has its advantages, it also carries disadvantages in hitting the profitability of domestic firms. China has deliberately pegged its currency to the US dollar because china’s inherent cost advantage over the USA has allowed Chinese goods to swamp the US market. There is now a move in the US senate to impose a tariff of 27.5% on Chinese goods coming into the USA unless Chins revalues its currency by 10% against the US dollar. At the time of writing, Greenspan has managed to persuade the Senate that the Chinese will revalue, and to hold off proceeding with the bill. One thing any government has to take on board is that central banks can either intervene in the foreign exchange markets to defend their currencies, or in the domestic markets to try to affect interest rates and domestic growth. In the long term they cannot do both. 06/07/05 Unequal Britain: Who pays for the 2012 London Olympics? "Just like the Millennium Dome, the London 2012 Olympic is just an excuse to concentrate Britain's resources in the capital of England. Urban renewal is a worthy enough goal in its self but why should the rest of Britain, and Scotland in particular, fund London's urban renewal," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "Any notion that we live in an equal Britain should be dispensed with immediately, suggested Olympic benefits to Scotland are patronising beads for the natives." "Manchester held a successful Commonwealth Games in 2002. Why were the resources built for those Games not expanded on for an Olympic bid? The argument that the Olympics are for capital cities is specious, how did Atlanta qualify in 1996?" "Billions were squandered in London on the Millennium Dome and now the rest of Britain is being asked to fund London urban renewal again to an estimated tune of £500 million, and when did you last hear of a project coming in under budget? When Scottish schools and hospitals are closed and services are reduced in the future because of lack of funds, we can all look South and watch our taxes build London up." "London could not lose. Even if the bid had failed work was already ongoing on London Underground and other infrastructure projects, particularly transport. London's Evening Standard can describe Scots as subsidy junkies, if they want, but they should look closer to home to see where the subsidies are really going." 12 06 05 SI (Scots Independent) article - EU Constitution referendum The Constitution is dead. Oh no it isn't’t! Oh yes it is! Oh no it ism’t! Look out behind you! And so the pantomime of the EU goes on. For something which we were told was not really all that important, that would change nothing about the actual workings of the EU and which was no more than a “tidying up exercise”, the EU Constitution is causing a great deal of angst among the self-styled EU political elite. In the week after the referenda in France and the Netherlands, Jean-Claude Junker, the Luxembourg Prime Minister said, “ The process is not dead. It would be dead if the British Government wanted to abandon the process, but this is not the case.” On June 8th, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer insisted the no votes (in France and the Netherlands) were, “not an end, rather an interruption”. The Poles, Irish and Danes said they would wait until after the Summit, to decide whether or not to continue with their referenda. At the time of writing, the Summit has almost finalised its conclusion that there is now no rush for ratification. The EU leaders have decided the Constitution is no longer a matter of life and death. The date can be put back until the various populations have been softened up sufficiently to ensure the governments will get the answer they want – or hope for. At the moment, it could be a long, long time before the people are going to be in the mood to be conned further. Because conned they have been. Year in and year out, the people of the EU have been fed a constant diet of distortions, half-truths, evasions and out and out lies, lies such as Independence in Europe. The one factor which might have saved the great project has also been shown to be built on sand. The single market, followed by the single currency has not made the EU the economic powerhouse that was promised. Critics of the whole concept of the final aim of the EU political elite, the United States of Europe built on federal lines, including this writer, have long maintained that in order to make the project a reality, more and more centralised control would have to be imposed. The single currency could not possibly work without rigid discipline on public spending, and government borrowing. In turn, this would inevitably lead to a harmonisation of taxation, so that monetary and fiscal policy were used to complement each other, rather than fiscal policy being used by governments to negate the effect of a monetary policy totally unsuited to their particular economic conditions. The harmonisation of taxation looks to be further away than ever, as the single currency begins to show serious signs of early wear and tear. Just as the European Monetary System had to be abandoned because of the restraints it imposed on countries struggling to cope with different economic conditions, so the euro is contributing to the major difficulties being experienced in Italy, France and Germany. It is being argued that the major conflict between the UK and the rest of the EU, over economic reforms, is based on a different approach to government taxation and spending policies. The EU, particularly France and Germany, intend to protect their social policies, whereas the UK wants much more of a free market approach. We are told the main objection to the Constitution in France and the Netherlands, was the “Anglo-Saxon” nature of its commitment to the free market. If that is true, it rather knocks on the head the argument that the French and Dutch were voting on domestic political issues and their opposition to the Constitution was merely to have a go at their own governments. What cannot be denied, whatever the differing views about economic reform within the EU, is that the euro has been a major disappointment. The people of the euro zone are at one in their belief that domestic prices have soared since the introduction of the euro, whatever the official government figures for inflation claim. The interest rate, imposed by the European Central Bank (ECB), is not suited to the economic conditions in either France or Germany, witness the changes in the Growth and Stability Pact and there is such open hostility to the single currency in Italy, that the Italian Finance Minister is calling for a return to the lira. Where does that leave the national movement in Scotland, given the SNP’s long standing commitment, not only to membership of the EU but also to the single currency, despite the devastation caused to the Scottish steel and fishing industries? Alex Neil recently wrote an article comparing the fortunes of Scotland and Norway over the past thirty years, the years during which oil has poured from the their respective sectors of the North Sea. By all accounts the article was well received in Nationalist circles, which tends to make the answer to the question rather obvious. 03/06/05 EMU and Euro fudge! "Is the Euro on the way out?" asked Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "A bad couple of days for the EU with two heavy defeats for the EU Constitution are going to get much worse with what appear to be moves afoot in several EU countries to bypass or fudge the united currency in which so much hope was invested." "One down side of a united currency was always going to be that countries would no longer be able to influence their own economy and be at the mercy of interest rates set elsewhere, just like Scotland trapped in Britain." "There was an article published recently in the German magazine 'Der Stern' and yesterday (Thursday, June 2) in the Dutch national newspaper 'De Telegraaf' stating that the German Finance minister Hans Eichel and the head of the Bundesbank Axel Weber had discussed the possibility that the EMU would eventually completely collapse, which would put the Euro under even more pressure. Both have since denied this." "The usually well-informed Stern however says that they have a set of confidential notes from Eichel in which he complains that as a result of the introduction of the euro, Germany has lost the possibility to stimulate the economy herself through lowering interest rates. Again, the German Ministry of Finance denied the existence of the notes." "However, the council of seven economic experts that advise the German government confirmed that as a result of the introduction of the Euro Germany had lost her interest rate advantage, which had slowed down the economic growth." "This morning in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Reppublica, Roberto Maroni, Italy's Minister of Social Affairs, declared that Italy should consider switching to a double system of Lira and Euro, and that he wants to hold a referendum on that. He wondered whether it would not better to return, temporarily, to a system in which two currencies would circulate." "Maroni labelled the introduction of the euro as a failure in regard to economic growth: since its introduction three years ago, the currency has proven that it can not deal with the economic stagnation, the loss of competitiveness, and the employment crisis. There has also been a suggestion today on Dutch TV that Chancellor Schroeder would like German Mark to return." 29/05/05 EU Constitution voted down in France "Well done
voters in France for striking a blow against the European 12/05/05 SI (Scots Independent) article - Anyone for Independence? In the halcyon days of the 1970s, Nationalists used to talk about Independence as “an idea whose time has come”. Looking at the election results in the intervening years, one is forced to ask what happened. For some analysts, the national movement stopped selling the idea, although that is not the consensus view by any manner of means. It is however, the view of a great many ex members and former activists of the Scottish National Party. I am not about to give the SNP advice on how to fight their campaigns. The party membership did not accept it when I was one of them; they are hardly likely to listen to it now. But a few observations might be in order. Last month’s editorial in the SI claimed the SNP’s campaign had been fought on the issue of independence. That was not my reading of the campaign and the campaign literature in Ochils and South Perthshire did not contain the word independence even once. Reports suggest there was scant mention of it in Pete Wishart’s seat either. Pete won, Annabelle didn’t, so does it matter? The party is being fed the line that they hit their target of six seats and came very close to making it seven. Therefore the election was a great success, despite the loss of 50,000 votes, the share of the vote down for the third consecutive election and now standing at 17.7%. The leadership’s reaction is not being bought by commentators and analysts but it is redolent of the leadership reaction to the SNP results in 1987. In that election the party spent the entire campaign talking up the Labour vote, offering to keep Labour in power if there was a hung parliament. The result was the loss of Dundee East and the Western Isles, although the party was told the election had been a great success because three seats had been won in the North East, which meant the party’s representation had gone up by 50%. Previous leaders, Gordon Wilson and Billy Wolfe, are quoted as agreeing with the analysis of the recent election, stating that given the choice, they would take more seats rather than a higher share of the popular vote. In last month’s SI, Mike Russell made a strong plea for targeting resources for 2007 and in The Scotsman, Duncan Hamilton wrote that the way forward was to offer a deal for a coalition to the Lib/Dems. Nicol Stephen, tipped to be the next leader of the Scottish Lib/Dems, did not rule that possibility out. It will be interesting to see the reaction of Alex Salmond et al. Having once offered a deal to keep Labour in power, offering to share power with the Lib/Dems, should be seen as a step forward. The above analysis might be acceptable for a party, which is contesting elections in a country which is independent. In that kind of scenario, it is possible to build a power base, restricted to a particular part of the country and then expand that base. Depending on the spread of population and the geographic spread of the constituencies, it might be possible to be a regional party and still win power – witness Labour in Scotland. Is it an acceptable analysis for a party that claims to be the leader of the Nationalist movement, in a country which is not independent? I don’t think it is. It should be of concern to all who claim to be Nationalists, that a born again liar, leading a party unfit to hold office, is preferred by the people of Scotland, to the possibility of independence. Those voters who could not stomach the thought of voting for Blair and New Labour, preferred the Lib/Dems, even in parts of the country where Lib/Dem votes traditionally, were as scarce as hen’s teeth. The last time they did that in Scotland was 1983, when they flocked to the Alliance. Clinton made famous the maxim, “It’s the economy stupid”, and in some elections it is. But Bush rather unravelled that maxim and showed there are times when people do vote on the basis of things other than financial. It should concern Nationalists that the national movement has been unable to tap into those values and mores, which place more importance on matters of principle than on self-gain. If those who vote for independence, however it is defined, become confined to one area of Scotland, the potential for mischief making by Westminster becomes a major problem. There should be no no-go areas in Scotland for Nationalism. There should be no parts of the country which could be encouraged to hive off to England, in the event of a positive vote for independence, on the basis that the majority in that part of the country voted to remain a part of the UK. I made those arguments in the 1960s. It is sad I am still making them forty years later. 09/05/05 The EU will not go away, neither will the Free Scotland Party "The European Union is not going to go away, more's the pity," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party. He continued, "The EU will continue to disrupt fishing, it will continue to disrupt farming and encroach on more and more aspects of Scottish life, 70-80% of law is already EU law, superceding laws agreed in national parliaments be they in Edinburgh or London." "The EU will continue to live with institutionalised corruption, each and every one of us is paying tax to the EU to pass on to fruadsters, and no one in the political parties that support the EU seems to care. Corruption in the Common Agricultural Policy is estimated to cost each of us £16-£20 added on to our weekly shopping bills." "Tony Blair, as a head of government, will continue to make up policy with other heads of state for the EU Commission to impose across the EU. None of these policies will have been put to voters in the EU, how can anyone pretend that the EU is democratic? The heads of government are elected for national government, not for EU government, they select unelected Commissioners who are then untouchable. Forget the MEPs, they are only a decoration as is the EU parliament." "The EU is all pervading, it is creeping into every aspect of Scottish life. As an example, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations (SFHA) asked all candidates in the election whether they would support the SFHA campaign in reducing and then removing VAT on building renovation work. A straightforward enough question on the face of it, however, Westminster cannot remove VAT on building renovation work because the EU rules state that when VAT has been placed on an item, it cannot be removed, it can be reduced to 5% but can not be removed. When did we get to vote on that one, why are our MPs happy to accept interference at this micro level?" "The Free Scotland party will continue to make the case against the EU and will continue to make the case for a government in Scotland that is answerable only to voters in Scotland." "This was the Free Scotland party's first election, it was a learning experience for us and hard work getting our message across. Despite this, Free Scotland persuaded some folk of our case and we thank those voters for that." "We will have another two years before the next election, so we would hope to build up organisation and support further to make a bigger impact in the future. The EU will not be going away, neither will the Free Scotland party." 28/04/05 CAP, Common Agricultural Policy, madness and corruption! "How does anyone justify the results of the Common Agricultural Policy on land use in the islands?", asked Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "The EU is paying farmers to ‘set aside’, to deliberately not grow food in a hungry world, where supply of food for our own citizens could easily be lost in a volatile world. Farmers should be encouraged to grow food to make the most effective use of their land." "When the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) took over, it destroyed an effective method of subsidy in Scotland. Previously, the farmers representatives and the government met and agreed a level of payment. The target was for the country to feed itself. If the harvest was in surplus then farmers got their agreed price and because there was a surplus consumer costs were kept down too. In the event of a shortage, supplies were bought in from foreign markets." "CAP changed all that. CAP was geared to subsidies for production which lead to the iniquitous food mountains. To cut production, set aside was brought in with farmers being paid not to produce food. Farmers are paid to keep land in a condition that it could be returned to agriculture. The next CAP ruse is a single payment, the only problem is that eighteen months before implementation no one knows how it is to be calculated or what they might get, not a great way to be asked to run a business! The only thing that seems sure is that small farms will suffer with the bulk of cash going to major grain growers south of border." "CAP consumes 50% of the EU annual budget. It is wide open to corruption, the Greeks famously claimed subsidies for olive production for an area larger than the land mass of Greece. It is calculated that the consumer pays £16-£20 extra in an average weekly shopping basket because of EU CAP corruption. If we left the EU tomorrow, we could pay pensioners a £16-£20 a week increase instead of of paying it to thieves." "Norway has voted against membership in two referendums on the EU. A significant part of the popular support in Norway against membership of the EU has come from the small farmer communities. Governments there have encouraged farmers to farm in often hostile conditions in a farming style suitable to the terrain and food production. Is it any wonder that the Norwegians will not let the EU and CAP in?" "Supermarkets have been another source of grievance for farmers. The supermarkets are using their muscle to force prices down as production costs go up. Consumers would be hard pressed to say that they are getting a fair deal from the supermarkets based in the Islands, with many of the special offers being paid for by the producer rather than the supermarket." "In part, a reaction from farmers to CAP and the supermarkets has been the growth of the farmers market movement. These markets should be supported. They have found a ready market with more and consumers wanting to know that meat is traceable to the farm it was produced on and that the produce is fresh." "And the future, can we trust a government that is in thrall to the EU and that often has its Annual Conference sponsored by Tesco to produce a fair plan for the future of land use? Time to get out of the EU and CAP." 25/04/05 BBC interference in election! "The BBC is interfering in the Orkney and Shetland election to an unacceptable level," declared Brian Nugent, candidate for the Free Scotland part. "BBC Radio Scotland are holding a hustings meeting in Shetland on Tuesday (26 April) during the 12 to 2 programme. I have been informed that the candidates of what are described as major parties will be on the platform while the candidates of what are described as the minor parties will be seated in the audience and will be asked to speak on occasion." "This is unacceptable. If there are 8 candidates in Shetland then there should be 8 candidates on a hustings platform in Shetland. What right does the BBC have to decide who should have prominence that is up to the voters in Shetland to decide on May 5." "I feel that the BBC are overstepping the mark and actually interfering with this election. Why bother to come to Shetland and not reflect the election that is taking place here and try to impose an election on Shetland that is taking elsewhere. The BBC are applying national guidelines, I would say hiding behind these national guidelines, which have no relevance to the local situation in Shetland. The Radio programme might as well be coming from Shettleston, or indeed Sheffield." "BBC Radio Orkney are taking this interference a stage further by not allowing me to take part in the hustings that they have organised for Thursday (28 April)." "Working at Shetland College as I have to through the election period I simply can not get to Orkney." "I had hoped to join the debate from the Radio Shetland premises but I have been told that this will not be allowed." "Surely with modern technology that would not be Mission Impossible for an organisation with the resources and technical skill of the BBC. The conclusion has to be that BBC Radio Orkney want to exclude me from the debate." In a further development, Mr Nugent offered to use the video conference facilities at Shetland College to link into the meeting being held In Orkney College. BBC Radio Orkney declined this offer. Mr Nugent intends to take these matters further with the BBC at national level and will also be in contact with the Electoral Commission. 22/04/05 EU, UK: time to go! "When we were asked about joining the Common Market, did we vote to destroy fishing, for the Common Agricultural Policy to ruin farming, for the closing of the Scottish Steel industry, for the United States of Europe?" asked Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party. He answered, "No. The European Union is a completely different animal from the Common Market that we got a vote on. The United States of Europe is on the way. Free Scotland say ask the voters what they think of the EU in a three question referendum. Free Scotland say vote No to the EU Constitution, No to the Euro and Yes to withdrawal from the EU." "Look to Norway! Not in the EU, discovers oil and gets richer. Look to Scotland! In the EU and the UK, discovers oil and gets poorer. Time to get out of the EU and UK!" "The EU is corrupt, the accounts have not been signed off for the last ten years. Would you be a member of a social club on that basis? Definitely not. There is a proposal that investigative journalists are to be banned from the EU parliament to stop them finding corruption." " The EU is undemocratic, we elect MEPs whose function according to Iain MacWhirter in the Herald is to “heckle”, they have no real power. Recently, they did vote down a package of reforms to their very generous expenses packages including a pension scheme that most of us could only dream about." "The EU is bureaucratic. Unelected civil servants implement the policies decided upon by Council of Ministers, heads of government, who never put these policies to their electorate." 21/04/05 Saltire: Fly the flag! The Free Scotland party has said let’s fly the flag of St Andrew, the flag of Scotland and let’s be proud of our history and the influence that we have had on the World, much more than might have been expected for a small country, The Free Scotland party have registered the Saltire as their party emblem and will continue to encourage the Tartan Army, rugby fans, individuals, the Saltire Society, public buildings and whoever and wherever else to fly the flag as they see fit. Other political parties have Free Scotland’s permission to use the Saltire as long as they acknowledge that they are using the Free Scotland emblem. Should they not wish to do so, they should consider paying Free Scotland a mutually agreeable fee. (Clarification - Free Scotland has not taken out copyright on the Saltire. Free Scotland has registered the Saltire with the Electoral Commission (http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/regulatory-issues/) for use by Free Scotland candidates as the emblem that will appear against the candidate name, no more, no less. The third paragraph above was tongue in cheek!) 20/04/05 Tidal and wave the future, Nuclear, no way! The Free Scotland party says boost funding for tidal and wave power; get national guidelines in place for wind power and Nuclear power no way. Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party, said, "incredibly, Nuclear power is being pushed as a 'clean' option for future energy needs. Tell them that in Caithness, Chernobyl and Three Mile Island! We must put as much time and money and research into tidal and wave power as ever went into the environmental disaster that is Nuclear power and then compare what we can do unlike now when all the research and money poured into Nuclear power dwarves that put into tidal and wave research." "Wind power has a place but planning confusion due to there being no national guidelines leaves councils in the lurch, unsure why they might deny permission and opening up the possibility of expensive and lengthy appeals. Wind farms cause controversy as they are intrusive for those living near by and putting them up in wilderness areas raises hackles. The Scottish Executive really has to wake up to this issue and to the issue of charging to get the electricity to the national grid." "Wind power is not the full answer as many are touting, there are days even in Shetland when there is not enough wind and then other days when there is too much!" "Tidal and wave research should be heavily invested in to the same extent that Nuclear was in the past and then compare the possibilities. Our coastline could be Scotland's greatest asset for future power generation. Scotland was one of the lead countries in wind power technology but took cold feet and now others dominate the wind power technology market. Tidal and wave technology is an opportunity for Scotland to get ahead " “Insulation is the less fashionable end of the power issue. Better insulated homes mean saved cash for residents and less call on energy resources. Grants should be opened to more people, particularly pensioners.” "Some Nuclear apologists say that Nuclear power is clean! Free Scotland says that nuclear waste is the responsibility of the country that produced it. No one in Scotland should accept nuclear waste being imported into Scotland but they should be aware that Scotland is being investigated as a potential nuclear waste dumping ground.” "The Highlands and Islands are ideally placed for producing environmentally friendly power but if we are serious about producing electricity in remote area then Interconnectors must be put in place and the electrical infrastructure across the Highlands and Islands has to be improved to be able to move electricity from where it is produced to where it is needed. Another issue that has to be investigated is the punitive charging to Islands companies for transmitting their electricity to the national grid Set up properly, the export of Scottish electricity to England and beyond would be a good source of revenue." 19/04/05 Third Free Scotland candidate in place The Free Scotland party are delighted to announce that Dallas Carter will stand in the Motherwell and Wishaw seat at the forthcoming General Election. Free Scotland want to be free of the UK and free of the EU. Free Scotland will be fielding three candidates in total. Maitland Kelly will stand in Ochil and South Perthshire, Brian Nugent in Orkney and Shetland and Dallas in Motherwell and Wishaw. Candidate
CV 18/04/05 Manifesto Launch The Free Scotland party today launched it's National Manifesto for the 2005 General Election. On constitutional issues Free Scotland wants an Independent Scotland, independent of the UK, independent of the EU. Grown up countries make their own decisions, Scotland should do the same, Scottish decisions should be made in a Scottish Parliament by Scottish politicians answerable only to voters in Scotland! Free Scotland says
hold a 3 question referendum on EU issues, Question 1 on the EU constitution Free Scotland says
vote NO to the EU Constitution, Free Scotland says vote NO to the Euro On Fishing, Free Scotland say get the politician out of fishing. Hand over control of Scottish fishing grounds to Scottish fishermen organisations and fish processors organisations. The successful fisheries in the North Sea are in Norway, Iceland and the Faeroes because of local control and they are not in the EU! Free Scotland is calling for a 200 mile exclusive fishing border species quota negotiated locally local fishermen to close fishing grounds to protect breeding or immature fish an immediate end to by catch, what is caught is landed bigger mesh sizes
to allow younger, smaller fish to escape and mature Nuclear power is being pushed as a 'clean' option for future energy needs. Irony! Now the Nuclear power industry are doing irony. Waste! Free Scotland says that nuclear waste is the responsibility of the country that produced it. No one in Scotland should accept nuclear waste being imported into Scotland but they should be aware that Scotland is being investigated as a potential nuclear waste dumping ground. Our coastlines could be Scotland's greatest asset for future power generation. Tidal and wave technology is a chance for Scotland to get ahead. Grants for insulation should be more readily available, especially for pensioners, better insulated homes would allow us to cut back on the level of energy production required. The Highlands and Islands are ideally placed for producing environmentally friendly power but if we are serious about producing electricity in remote area then the electrical infrastructure needed across the Highlands and Islands has to be improved to be able to move electricity from where it is produced to where it is needed. 13/04/05 Full steam ahead for MEPs gravy train! The Free Scotland Party has condemned MEPs for voting down reforms to expenses claims. MEPs voted to maintain a system that allows them to pocket huge amounts of expenses with one MEP, Chris Davies, being quoted as saying that the decision “gives the all clear to embezzlement.” Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, said, “you could not write a script that would do justice to the EU. Last winter MEPs were caught signing in for their daily allowance in the morning before hopping on the plane home. In March, the EU parliament suggested that one way to deal with EU corruption was to ban investigative journalists! And here we are in April and MEPs vote for the gravy train to continue to go full steam ahead.” “MEPs will bemoan continuing low turnout but what are voters supposed to think. Trust in MEPs and the EU is at an all time low, deservedly so.” 12/04/05 SI (Scots Independent) article - Define Independence, define Independence in Europe In politics definition is everything. It is difficult to debate something which cannot be defined. James Mitchell was only half right when he said the SNP needed to define independence. The SNP is not offering independence, it is offering Independence in Europe. That needs to be defined. Likewise, Mitchell’s definition of fundamentalism is flawed. As a fully paid-up member of the fundamentalists, I submit his is not an adequate definition. It was a label I neither sought nor liked, because it was so often used as a term of abuse. I was happy being a nationalist, holding the view that the pursuit of independence was more important than the pursuit of anything else. Others – conditional nationalists – thought differently. An independent Scotland had to be left-wing. Independence had to mean we would be better off. They rejected the idea of freedom for its own sake. Gradualism was a different debate. It was about strategy and tactics, not about the nature of nationalism. Conditional nationalism won and the SNP has been haemorrhaging members ever since. Although “restoration of sovereignty” is one of the SNP’s aims, it has difficulty defining it, insisting sovereignty can be “pooled” or “shared”. A nation can no more be a wee bit sovereign than a woman can be a wee bit pregnant. We are either sovereign or we are not. Sovereignty is not simply an abstract concept, it has practical applications. A claim to sovereignty is a claim by some representative authority in the name of “the people” to exercise a monopoly of law-making and law-enforcement within a designated territory. In an increasingly interdependent world, sovereign states have accepted specific treaty limitations on their law-making rights. But the EU goes further by requiring member states to cede a general right of law-making on a permanent basis, to EU institutions. Sovereignty is a legal as well as a philosophical way of describing the right of a people to govern itself, to determine its own priorities within the constraints imposed by its external environment. Increased interdependence may change the balance of advantage and disadvantage in any “self-determined” act. But it cannot make the principle of self determination or self-government superfluous. At any level of integration or interdependence, a community of people must ask itself how important it is to retain the right to make its own choices between the options with which they are faced. The SNP has never asked that question. 10/04/05 Faith in our Fishermen The Free Scotland Party says hand over control of Scottish fishing grounds to Scottish fishermen organisations and fish processors organisations, Brian Nugent, spokesperson for Free Scotland said, "The only way to protect Scottish fishing is the radical step of getting the politicians out of the way and handing over control to those whose livelihoods depend on fish." “Since the Tories signed up to membership of the Common Market without even getting a translation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), fishing in Scotland has been on a downward spiral.” “There are successful fisheries in the North Sea in Norway, Iceland and the Faeros. Why are they succeeding? The answer is local control and no interference from European Union (EU) regulations.” “The Free Scotland Party says take the EU, UK and Edinburgh politicians out of the fishing issue and hand over local control of Scottish waters to Scottish fishermen’s organisations and fish processors organisations. No interference from outwith Scottish Fishing is acceptable and none should be allowed.” “Fishermen know that they have a finite resource, they only have to look to the Newfoundland Grand Banks to see what can happen to fishing stocks. Could fishermen make a worse job of maintaining fish stocks than the EU? Are here today, gone tomorrow politicians to be trusted ahead of the people who work in the industry?” “Total control of fishing by fishermen’s organisations and fish processors organisations would mean that fishermen would be in control of their own destiny. Fishermen would have a big stake in the future of their industry and would work to maintain a vibrant, viable industry well into the future. The alternative is an industry that is out of control because of outside interference and bungling!” “An Independent Scotland outwith the EU would have total control of fishing policy in an exclusive area 200 miles off the Scottish shore and share control of other grounds with other nations by agreement.” “Issues such as species quota should be negotiated locally with local fishermen deciding when to close fishing grounds to protect breeding or immature fish. There should be an end to the wicked practice of by catch, when perfectly good, edible fish are thrown dead back into the sea under EU instruction because they are the wrong species. Mesh sizes should be made bigger to allow younger, smaller fish to escape and mature.” “The EU claims to be trying to get fish stocks in Scottish waters back to sustainable levels but what will be the point if there is no Scottish Fishing fleet to take advantage.” “Fishing in Scotland is being destroyed because fishing in England is not an issue. The handful of constituencies in England that have any fishing are simply ignored. The EU and the UK will continue to play games with the livelihoods of Scottish fishing communities while Scotland is part of the UK and the EU." 08/04/05 EU interference in domestic affairs Brian Nugent, Free Scotland candidate in Orkney and Shetland, has hit out at interference by the EU in domestic matters. He said, "While our sympathies must be with the workforce of the Rovers plant in Birmingham and all the other jobs that will be indirectly affected, estimated at over 20,000 in the West Midlands, why is it that there is no outcry about interference from the European Union in a domestic matter." "UK politicians seem to accept that the EU regulations should decide domestic policy, I have yet to hear one speak out against this interference. EU regulations will not allow a bridging loan to the ailing car company." "Voters in Orkney and Shetland are well used to EU interference in their affairs, you only have to look at the reducing numbers of fishing boats in the constituency." "There is a history of this. The EU said that there was too much Steel production in the UK, Mrs Thatcher closed the Steel plants in Scotland. Ireland has since developed a Steel industry." "UK politicians seem incapable of action on Rover or the fishing industry, they jump to Brussels tune. The Liberal Democrats seem to think that they have achieved something when they get the promise, no more, no less, of a visit at some point in the future to the constituency from the EU Fishing Commissioner. It is time for more than pathetic, empty gestures." 19/03/05 EU interference in referendum campaign The Free Scotland Party today condemned news that the European Parliament will finance a campaign for the EU Constitution referendum in the UK, Brian Nugent spokesperson for Free Scotland said, "What we are going to get is an unfair campaign with tax payers money being used to promote one particular side of the argument about the Constitution." "The European Parliament plan is to spend £86,000 promoting the EU Constitution. This is blatantly unfair and militates against a fair referendum campaign, one which all parties could contest equally and then accept and respect the result." "It also flies in the face of what the government said in February that "not a single penny" of EU funds would be spent promoting the Constitution. Jack Straw personally ruled out EU spending in newspaper article." "The European Parliament claims that it will provide neutral "information", but it also says that it will "explain to the public how the Constitution will benefit them in their everyday lives", not a neutral stand point at all." "Jack Straw has been trying to get the EU to block spending on the referendum but it would seem that even the British government can not run its own referendum without interference from the European Union." 18/03/05 How to cure EU fraud, ban investigative journalists! The Free Scotland Party has described the proposal by the EU parliament to ban investigative journalists as laughable while fraud in the EU continues to grow unchecked. The European Parliament has proposed banning journalists from key parts of its buildings after a German television crew filmed MEPs leaving work immediately after signing in to receive their daily expenses. Each MEP can claim up to 268 euros as a daily "subsistence allowance". "Most folk would regard this as a bogus expenses claims which journalists should have highlighted," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for Free Scotland. He continued, "No doubt Struan Stevenson will welcome this proposal to hide away what is going on given that he was caught rather publicly claiming the daily subsistence allowance early in the morning before heading to the airport to take part in a Conservative press conference in Scotland." "The European Parliament's administrative bureau has proposed banning the media from key sections of the institution, establishing zones where journalists would be banned from filming, it raised the possibility of seizing journalists' television and photography equipment and suggested that journalists should be made to sign up to an agreement to "adopt a manner appropriate to the institution of Parliament". It further proposed that any journalists caught breaking this agreement could be barred from entering the EP buildings from between six months and two years." "While Jose Liberato, a European Parliament spokesman, said that the new code was needed to "clarify" the existing rules, Hans Peter Martin, an Austrian MEP, and leading anti corruption campaigner has attacked what he described as an attempt to seal off parts of Parliament and turn it into a secret chamber." "The ban is all the harder to fathom given that the EU seems to be in denial about the scale of fraud in the EU, surely investigative journalists should be encouraged rather than banned." Jules Muis, former director-general of the EU's Internal Audit Service, referred in an email to the fact that the EU's accounts have not been signed off for the last ten consecutive years, Muis wrote, "Ten years after the Commission first failed to get normal audit blessing on its accounts and controls, it still does not have a proper accountability construct." Mr Muis was writing to the disciplinary hearing of Marta Andreasen, the EU's former Chief Accountant, who was sacked for refusing to ignore evidence of fraud and refusing to sign off the Commission's accounts. " Mr Muis suggested that Marta Andreasen was a "focused and determined professional who was asking the right questions" and that her trial by the Commission had been a "smoke and mirrors side-show", relying on character smear by anonymous witnesses, he suggested that the Commission's Budget Directorate prefers to "trash" officials who question its methods rather than investigate complaints. Mr Nugent described character assassination by anonymous witnesses as sinister and absolutely out of place in what is supposed to be a democratic organisation. 12/03/05 SI (Scots Independent) article - Scottish Regiments When the British State murdered Farquhar Shaw, Samuel and Malcolm McPherson and transported 200 of the regiment on July 12th 1743, they cemented the formation of the Black Watch in government treachery, lies and deceit. Thus was set a pattern of behaviour of British governments in their dealing with Scottish troops. It should come as no surprise, that the end of the Black Watch should be brought about in the same climate of treachery, lies and deceit and the final action of this noble regiment should be in such an ignoble cause. There are numerous other examples that could be given throughout the past two centuries but one which still sticks in the craw of many people in the Highland area of Scotland, will suffice. The betrayal by Churchill of the 51st Highland Division in June 1940 was a criminal waste of an entire division for political ends. The Division could have been lifted from at least two French ports before being overwhelmed at St Valery en Caux but Churchill refused, in a vain attempt to keep the French in the war. As always the Black Watch fought to the last, clinging on in the small village of Houdetot until they ran out of ammunition three hours after the general surrender had been given. Of the hundred men who hung on, thirty three were killed. Betrayed by their government and abandoned in the field by many of their French allies, the Division lost over 1000 killed, 4000 wounded and over 8,000 captured. Over 30,000 men served in the Black Watch in W W I and the regiment suffered 28,000 casualties with 8,000 killed. Only one other Scottish regiment suffered a higher number of deaths, The Royal Scots, which lost 12,000 men. There are 61 names on the war memorial on the old Pullar building in Perth, 40 of them Black Watch. In Crieff there are 221 names, 75 of them Black Watch, Muthil 34 names, 11 Black Watch and in Braco 22 names, 11 Black Watch. Although having only 10% of the population of the UK, Scotland suffered 20% of the casualties in W W I, a pattern repeated in W W II. We provided 25% of the troops in the first Iraq war and when I asked Lord Clyde why this should be, he replied, "It was their turn." A closer look at Scotland's military history shows, it was always "their turn". Perthshire has paid dearly for our commitment to the Black Watch, as did the coal fields of Fife, and Dundee and the Glens of Angus. At the end of WWI, the towns, glens and braes of Perthshire were much quieter places and there was a period in the 1960s when Perth's Town Officer, the Lord Provost and five councilors had all been captured at St Valery. I am opposed to the save the regiments campaign, not because I see them as part of the British imperial past, the most often heard lament from the self-styled left in Scottish politics. I wore the Red Hackle with pride and members of my family served in the Black Watch, Scots Guards, Scots Greys, Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders, Royal Scots and HLI. They saw service in France, Salonica, Gallipoli in W W I and France, North Africa, Sicily, Italy and Burma in W W II, as well as Suez, Kenya and Korea in later conflicts. Not all of them made it home and some of those who did, bore the scars for the rest of their lives. I am opposed to the campaign because in WWI, 27% of Scottish troops mobilised were killed, as opposed to 12% for British forces overall. In WWII, Scots dead were a third of the UK total and in Korea it was 25%. Casualty lists like that do not happen by accident. We are told the planned re-organisation will affect recruitment in Scotland. So long as Scotland is still part of the UK, I would have thought that was a good thing. Or do we want to continue to send our young men to serve governments that cannot be trusted, who have always regarded Scottish troops as more expendable than those from other parts of the UK? If there is a EU defence force, do we want to send our troops under the command of the EU? It is one thing to be proud of our military record. It is another to throw our young men's lives away. An independent Scotland could not bring back our dead but it could ensure no more young lives were wasted. We can always bring back our regiments, but under Scottish control. 11/03/05 SNP should come clean on Independence! Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, has requested the SNP to come clean on their policy position on Independence. "After Alex Salmond interviews in the Scotsman (Wednesday) and on Newsnight (Thursday), it is hard to tell where the SNP stands on Independence. Are the SNP taking their first steps towards dropping Independence? Is it the case that the SNP have settled for devolution?" "A further comment from a Peter MacMahon article in the Scotsman (Friday) saying that "Senior Nationalists are already saying in private that they were never really in favour of "independence", but joined the SNP to win "self-government" add fuel to this particular fire." "As for the "Senior Nationalists" comment, I can believe that, over my period of SNP membership, nearly 30 years, there were several SNP members who wanted devolution and not necessarily Independence. A bit worrying if these type of folk have worked themselves up to senior nationalist level in the SNP." "There are echoes here of the way that the Independence in Europe slogan was sprung on the SNP membership by the then SNP leadership a number of years back. Delegates turning up to an SNP annual conference found a banner adorning the conference platform which read Independence in Europe. Suddenly this meaningless slogan was an inexplicable policy without any debate by the membership." "SNP members should be careful that they are not getting manouvered into a policy change a la Independence in Europe." 09/03/05 Free Scotland welcomes launch of Independence First campaign Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, today welcomed the launch of the Independence First campaign. He said, "Independence First is asking for a referendum on Independence for Scotland, something that all nationalists of whatever party or none should be able to unite behind." "If Unionists are so sure of their case maybe they should be behind this referendum too. Many polls show that there are big percentages of voters for Unionist parties who favour an Independent Scotland." "In the same way that Unionist parties united under the Scottish Constitutional Convention to push for the devolved parliament in Edinburgh, nationalist political parties should unite under the Independence First banner to promote a referendum on Independence." Months of debate and planning came to fruition with the official inauguration of a campaign to demand an Independence Referendum for Scotland. It was agreed that this campaign, known as "Independence First", should be grass roots generated - formulated without the undue influence of any political party. It was therefore decided that steering group members would be deliberately drawn from several different parties and from none. After today, Independence First would welcome the future participation of MSPs, MPs, MEPs, Party officials etc. as individual members of the campaign, as well as general messages of support from such parties as see fit to do so. The electorate have been encouraged to equate support for independence with the ballot total for pro-independence parties. However, for a variety of reasons, that is always a much lower percentage than that which actually supports independence itself. It is therefore not well known that there have been polls showing a majority in favour of independence in the past. For example, ICM Polls carried out for The Scotsman between the 5th June 1998 and the 4th April 1999 indicated that, on average, 53.9% of those expressing an opinion, favoured Independence. Independence First members therefore believe that refusing to test this issue in a referendum is intrinsically undemocratic and in effect a disenfranchisement of the Scottish people on this issue. They therefore demand that a referendum on Scottish Independence be carried out and that all those who would claim to be democrats support that demand. A member of Independence First; Niall Aslen said "While many believe Scotland suffers from an unequal union with a much bigger neighbour, and that that has mostly been to Scotland's disadvantage, there is also another issue involved here. One fundamental to the principles of democracy itself." In the initial stages of its campaigning, Independence First plans to build up a network of local groups throughout Scotland, and to use these to build up pressure on politicians of all political parties to support their demand for a referendum on independence. Anne Baird said: "I'm delighted. The Independence First campaign cuts out political differences and lets us get together on the real issue. Getting a voice for the people of Scotland is something we can all agree on. It's a campaign everyone can join." A website http://www.independence1st.com
is now in operation. In the 24/02/05 Call for a fair Referendum Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party has called on the Electoral Commission to follow the example of Holland as an example of best practice in setting limits for the funding of the EU referendum on the Constitution. Mr Nugent said, “Holland are holding their referendum on the EU Constitution on the 1st of June. The two sides of the Dutch campaign, opposing and supporting, will be provided with an equal budget for their campaigns of 400,000 euros each.” He continued, “A special commission has been set up to act as a watchdog in order to prevent any "irregularities" in funding from occurring. Meanwhile in the UK, there has to be a question over how fair the referendum can be if the UK government and the EU will be paying for EU Constitution propaganda using tax payers money to promote something that many of those taxpayers are opposed to.” 22/02/05 Spain, subdued SI! “77% of a 42% turnout means that less than one third of Spanish voters backed the EU Constitution in the referendum held on Sunday, “ said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party. “The EU were probably looking for more enthusiastic backing from the Spanish. Spain joined the EU in 1986 and it has been showered with EU funding since then but the Si from the Spanish voters was a very subdued Si.” Mr Nugent continued, “Meanwhile, comments from the Spanish Prime minister and the EU President underline the difference between the way the Constitution is seen in the rest of the EU and the way it is fraudulently presented in the UK. Other EU leaders are clear that the Constitution is a step which will be followed by further integration, the United States of Europe in other words, but the UK Government continues to claim that the constitution is a final step.” “Commission President, Jose Barroso said this week "I favour as much as possible an ever-closer union. I support as much as possible the community method - or if you want to use a risky word - the federal method.” New Labour may not tell it that way but that is the target.” “The Spanish prime minister, Jose Zapatero said that the Constitution was for a transnational state and will abolish national diplomatic services in comments that put out in the open the onward march to the United States of Europe.” 12/02/05 SI (Scots Independent) article - Scotland, partner or prisoner? We have been talking about the general election since January and at the time of writing, are into the second week of the campaign proper. But not a cheep has been heard about the most important issue of all viz the UK’s relations with the EU and what is likely to happen with the EU Constitution. The conspiracy of silence continues, while the political parties pretend the EU does not matter. In recent weeks I have debated the issue with two SNP members, Alyn Smith MEP and Sir Neil McCormick, ex- MEP, more of which below. On ITVs election programme The Scottish 500, Alex Salmond ignored the issue completely, other than to claim that the only interference we would have from the EU on taxation, would be their setting of a minimal level of VAT, which amounted to 1% of Scotland’s tax take. This meant Scotland would have control of 99% and that would equate to independence. At Beith, Alyn Smith claimed the EU would retaliate if an independent Scotland left, the retaliation taking the form of trade sanctions etc. He also argued that thousands of Scottish jobs depend on trade with the EU and those jobs would go. During my debate with Neil, his contribution was more about the principles involved but some of the audience led with the same old arguments about trade, human rights and so on. In short, the picture being painted by advocates of the EU was one where Scotland would be a prisoner, not a partner. We would have to do as we are told, or else. In fact, it is the sort of argument Unionists have made about the break-up of the UK for as long as I can remember. It is the sort of argument to which Nationalists regularly gave two fingers. That situation has now changed. The SNP no longer offers independence, it offers membership of another Union. A different kind of Union perhaps, but a Union nevertheless. It would also appear that the party leadership is prepared to be just as dishonest, as the Tories and New Labour are about the alleged benefits Scotland gets from membership of the UK, when extolling the alleged benefits of EU membership. There are arguments for giving no more public money to MG Rover, unless a radical overhaul of the entire structure of the company was to take place; and that is not to mention the £40 million which found its way into the pockets of the four directors. But even if the UK government had wanted to give the money to “save” an estimated 20,000 jobs, EU legislation would have stopped them. If a Scottish industry was in the same position, the same rules would be applied. We have already seen how competition policy works in the tendering process for the ferries to the Western Isles. The EU controls external trade, with the common external tariff, it controls competition policy within member states, with the rules on subsidy to industry – except the millions spent on French and German agriculture. The CAP adds approximately £16 per week to the average household’s shopping basket. At the same time, the French managed to scupper an agreement, which would have opened up service industries to cheaper foreign labour from the new members from the erstwhile Eastern Bloc. Alex Salmond’s claim that the EU has no influence or control over taxation and that Scotland would be independent if fiscal control was vested in Edinburgh is total nonsense. During the first week of the campaign, the Treasury admitted it had limited sovereignty over taxation because of a ruling by the EU Advocate-General, Poiares Maduro, which states that companies operating in several countries can write off losses in one country against gains made in another. Independent experts have estimated this will cost the UK Treasury at least £5,000 million. The Treasury states the figure is £1,000 million. The important point is the UK Treasury has surrendered sovereignty over taxation policy. The SNP is in favour of joining the Euro, arguing that allowing the European Central Bank to control Scotland’s monetary policy is somehow better than having Scotland control it. How that squares with returning sovereignty to the Scottish people will form the basis of next month’s article but suffice to say, the most recent agreement on the Stability and Growth Pact means trouble ahead, not just for the member states of the Euro zone, but also for the other members of the EU. We are likely to be faced with a referendum on the EU Constitution before the elections for the Scottish Parliament in 2007. The political parties have ensured the electorate are going to be kept in the dark for as long as possible and the SNP is as guilty as the rest. There is more to Scotland than fishing and the Scottish people deserve better than to be conned into another incorporating union. 06/02/05 Jim Fairlie at Beith 1320 Speakers Club “The one consistent factor in what little debate there has ever been, on the question of Scotland’s membership of the EU, is the sheer dishonesty of the arguments put forward by the Europhiles.” This was said by Jim Fairlie, speaking on behalf of the Free Scotland Party, at Beith 1320 Club on Sunday February 6th. Mr Fairlie continued, “From Ted Heath’s selling out of the Scottish steel and fishing industries, as a price of entry, to the SNP’s fatuous Independence in Europe, the Scottish people have never yet been told the truth about the real cost of membership. Every opinion poll shows the majority of people are opposed to UK membership of the Euro and Tony Blair has finally admitted that there is no economic argument for entry. At the same time he has also admitted there is a strong political argument for entry, having spent years denying the move to a single European currency has been driven by politics.” On the question of the EU Constitution, Mr Fairlie said, “All the major parties insist the EU Constitution is merely “a tidying up exercise”, while the SNP’s only objection to it is the control it gives over fishing to the EU. It matters little to the SNP that the Constitution will be the biggest surrender of sovereignty by member states, since the Single European Act and will give almost total control over the Scottish economy to a combination of the European Central Bank and the EU Commission.” Mr Fairlie concluded, “Because of their general disillusionment with politicians and politics in general, the Scottish people are in danger of allowing themselves to sleepwalk into membership of a European Federal State. That cannot be allowed to happen.” 27/01/05 Free Scotland cautious on EU Constitution question wording and campaign funding Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, today welcomed the news that the Electoral Commission are to investigate the wording of the question for the EU Constitution referendum which is “Should the United Kingdom approve the treaty establishing a constitution for the European Union?” He said, "Free Scotland suggested that the Plain English Society set up the EU referendum question but the involvement of the Electoral Commission will do just as well. But why stop at the wording of the referendum question? There has to be serious doubts about how fair the funding of any EU referendum campaign is going to be.” “From the record of abuse in previous referendum, the Electoral Commission should set spending limits on both sides. The EU bureaucracy and the UK government should not be allowed to promote the EU Constitution with taxpayers money. The EU should not be allowed any role in the ‘Yes’ campaign. EU and British civil servants must be kept out of the campaign." "The sources of propaganda from both sides should be above board and open to scrutiny. Let there be a fair referendum campaign, unusually for the UK!” "Free Scotland says hold a 3 question referendum. Question 1 on the EU constitution, question 2 on the Euro and question 3 on membership of the European Union." "Free Scotland says vote NO to the EU Constitution, No to the Euro, No to membership of the EU." 12/01/05 SI (Scots Independent) article - What Price Freedom? What price freedom? As Nationalists, what are we prepared to sacrifice to be free and independent? Sadly, for some, the answer is nothing. Unless it can be shown that Scotland will be a wealthier place, the status quo and government from London will do just nicely thanks. Of course there is always the EU to fall back on, hence Independence in Europe. This is supposed to represent a nice cosy alternative to the UK. After all, it has lower interest rates (and massively higher unemployment) and its advocates claim that it is the biggest market in the world. For some quaint reason, China and India, both of which are three times the size of the EU, are forgotten. But hey, we’re talking mythology here. In February 1974, I was the SNP candidate in Dundee West, standing against the sitting Labour MP, Peter Doig, whose majority over the SNP at the previous general election had been 22.000. He accepted a challenge to a public debate, during the course of which I said nationalism had nothing to do with economics. This was greeted with hoots of laughter by the Labour activists in the audience. To them, nationalism was only about economics and if it could be shown Scotland was subsidised, it was no contest. That argument has never changed much. The most recent attempt to “scare” Scots away from Nationalism came with Professor McLean’s analysis, which claimed Scotland had a current deficit of £8 billion. Oil revenues could not be relied on because they fluctuated and, in any case, an independent Scotland could not lay claim to all the revenues from the oil in the UK sector of the North Sea etc. etc. etc. Why should that argument still have resonance? Why do Unionists continue to trot it out with such regular monotony? It is not only a banal argument, it is a base argument and any Nationalist worthy of the name should simply respond, “Aye, and your point is?” Unfortunately, freedom for its own sake, is no longer argued with any conviction by the Nationalist movement. The economic tail now wags the Nationalist dog. As a guest at a recent dinner, a Tory tried to wind me up, aided by a senior executive of a major Scottish company. The conversation was along the usual lines. “How could we survive without the subsidies from England?” The executive had had a glass or three and was beginning to get a wee bit aggressive. I asked him if he really believed Scots were subsidised. “Of course,” he replied. “How does it feel,” I asked, “to live off the backs of people less fortunate than yourself? Those subsidies could be spent on the unemployed, homeless and socially disadvantage in England, if Scots didn’t get them.” Suddenly, the subsidy argument was less attractive. He paid his taxes therefore he wasn’t subsidised. I pointed out that if he lived in Scotland, and by his own calculations and those of the other Unionist parties, he was. I added there was not much dignity and self -respect in that scenario. The conversation kind of petered out at that stage. Nationalists have only themselves to blame for the fact that argument is still being used. Unfortunately too many Nationalists are themselves, conditional Nationalists, unwilling to pursue freedom for its own sake. Scots are not going to be managed into independence by proving Nationalists can make Devolution work. Nor are they going to be bribed into independence because London will always be able to appear to offer bigger bribes – and make them immediately available. Scots need to get back their self-respect and their dignity. They need to have leaders who can inspire them to value themselves, restore their feeling of self-worth, to have enough dignity to tell the Unionists to stuff their alleged subsidies and to feel insulted that anyone should presume their vote can be bought by the promise of a better pension. There will always be an economic content to any Nationalist campaign but economics must never be allowed to define our nationalism or determine our desire for freedom. 31/12/04 EU Constitution tactics condemned Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party, has condemned the spin doctor tactics of EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solano who was speaking on the BBC Radio Today programme. "Javier Solano said it would not be 'the end of the world' if the UK rejected the constitution, perhaps not, but it should be the end of the EU constitution. The EU constitution needs to be ratified by all member states or it can not be adopted. Is Mr Solano saying that the goalposts have been moved? The constitution should be history if any country rejects it." "Solano uses clever spin when he talks about the European family and Europe but never once mentions the EU. Europe is a concept that most folk are happy enough with but as was shown in the recent EU elections increasing numbers of voters are either too apathetic to vote or openly hostile to membership of the EU." "There is an implied threat when Solano talks about serious questions about the UK's relationship with the rest of European Union which would be raised if Britain rejects the proposed EU constitution. Tinpot EU bureaucrats should not be interfering in the internal politics of any of member state." "Britain is expected to hold a referendum on the proposed constitution in spring 2006. The Free Scotland Party is proposes a 3 question referendum on the Euro, on the EU Constitution and membership of the EU. Free Scotland would say No to all 3 questions." 31/12/04 Free Scotland candidates to stand in General Election The Free Scotland Party will field 3 candidates in the General Election due to take place in early 2005. Free Scotland (www.freescotlandparty.org) promotes Independence for Scotland and withdrawal from the European Union (EU). Brian Nugent, spokesperson for Free Scotland said, “The General Election will be the first time that Free Scotland candidates will stand for election. We are in the process of establishing ourselves, putting finance together and increasing membership. Our ultimate aim is a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland! The word only in that statement is what is important, we want a government unfettered by Westminster and the UK, and a government unfettered by Brussels and the EU." Brian Nugent will be the candidate in Orkney and Shetland, while Maitland Kelly, National Secretary of Free Scotland, will be the candidate in Ochil and South Perthshire. A third seat in the West of Scotland will be contested. Brian Nugent continued, “Free Scotland does not accept that a devolved parliament is enough, a position that some nationalist parties in Scotland seem to be moving towards, and we do not accept interference from the EU or the UK parliament in Scottish affairs.” “Scottish solutions to Scottish problems is an oft heard refrain which cannot be achieved in the EU, in the UK or in a devolved parliament situation." “Free Scotland want a 3 question referendum held on the EU Constitution, the Euro and membership of the EU. Even parties that are members of the EU Supporters Club should welcome a three question referendum. Let us find out what voters really think about the EU. Free Scotland feel that the outcome would be the opposite of what the EU Supporters Club would want!” “Free Scotland would campaign for a No vote on the constitution, a No vote on the Euro and a Yes vote on withdrawal from the EU.” “The EU is destroying Scottish Fishing with a cull of fish and Scottish fishermen with the successful fisheries in the North Sea in Norway, Faeroes and Iceland, those not run under EU restrictions. The EU promotes strict species quotas for Scottish boats but at the same time maintains Danish industrial fishing. Fishing is going the way of Scottish Steel. The EU decided that there was too much steel production in the EU. The UK decided that Scottish Steel would be sacrificed and Gartcosh and Ravenscraig were closed.” “Why stay members of a club that is against Scottish interests? Free Scotland is for withdrawal from the EU and from the UK for the very positive reasons that we need Scottish solutions to Scottish problems decided in Scotland by governments elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland.” Full contact details from http://www.freescotlandparty.org/contact_us.htm Candidate CV Candidate CV 21/12/04 Labour and Liberal Democrat talent free zones! The Free Scotland Party agrees with Lord Sewel, the Labour peer, when he said that the Labour and Liberal Democrat ranks in the Scottish Parliament are low on talent with few worthy ministers or potential replacements. Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland party, said, "the fact that the Labour party and the Liberal Democrat parties have no talent is hardly the fault of the Scottish Parliament or the Scottish Electorate. Bringing in unelected people is not the answer, patronage, corruption and Taminey Hall spring to mind. Get rid of the two parties at an election and get rid of the system that holds Scotland back." "What successful businessmen, used to running their own affairs, is going to come to a parliament in Edinburgh which is no more than the branch office of the Westminster parliament. An Independent parliament in Scotland answerable only to voters in Scotland is what is required." "Lord Sewel's intervention does highlight the anomoly that is the EU. In the EU, unelected bureaucrats make the law. MEPs are no more than a decoration, a nod towards democracy, they can and do do nothing. The growing unpopularity of the EU, witness voter turnout dropping through the floor, is not a good omen for Lord Sewel's suggestion." "There is an
arrogant assumption in what Lord Sewel believes which is that Labour
and the Liberal Democrats are irreplaceable. Ultimately, it is up the
voters who runs Scotland and under what 09/12/04 Scottish Parliament tell EU to get lost! "Hats off to the MSPs in the Scottish Parliament who voted down a proposal by the Scottish Executive to put out the West Coast ferries to tender under instruction from the EU", said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "Free Scotland's long term aim is to get out of the EU, so short term telling the EU to get stuffed sounds good to us!" "Nicol Stephen, the Scottish Executive minister for Transport, said that the ferries had to go out to tender under EU law." "EU law! We elect MSPs to the Scottish Parliament to make laws, we elect MPs to the UK Parliament to make laws but EU bureaucrats are a law unto themselves, they are not elected by EU voters! We elect MEPs to the European Parliament who are no more than window dressing, they can do nothing, they give the appearance of democracy to an undemocratic, corrupt organisation." "Free Scotland says get Scotland out of the EU, get Scotland out of the UK, Scottish decisions to be made in Scotland by a government elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland!" 04/12/04 MacShane, United States of Europe, New Labour and red herrings! "Denis MacShane, the Minister for Europe, has let a few cats out of the bag with his speech at Durham University", said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "MacShane highlights the creep towards the United States of Europe. He said, 'Europe is very young. This treaty won’t be the last word. It’s the rule book that seems to make sense for most of us at the moment.' This may not be what the government is saying but it is obvious that the United States of Europe is an on going project with total integration the end game. Those in favour of the EU should come out of the closet and admit as much instead of trying to hoodwink the electorate." "MacShane also suggested that individual countries should give up the right to speak on issues, leaving that to the EU and the EU President and EU Foreign Minister, a view hardly likely to endear him in the Foreign Office." "MacShane has been up front about Gordon Brown’s five economic tests for joining the single European currency. He called them "giant red herring", a view that many share. A minister dismissing the tests on record is dramatic." "There appears to be considerable disarray within New Labour which is reflected across many Scottish and British political parties." "Free Scotland welcomes MacShane's speech as a very honest appraisal of the EU. Free Scotland says that the EU Constitution referendum, which is expected in spring 2006 should be expanded to allow for a 3 question referendum. There should be questions on the EU Constitution, the euro and membership of the EU. Free Scotland would argue for a NO vote to each question asked.” MacShane was speaking to students at Durham University last week, making the case for the EU Constitution. His comments were recorded. Jim Fairlie address (Free Scotland speaker), St Andrew's Day rally, Saturday, the 27th of November 2004, Festival Square, Edinburgh "Just how important a symbol St Andrew could be for Scotland, can be gauged from the Executive's continued opposition to declaring St Andrew's day a public holiday. Nothing which can be used to promote Scotland's place among the independent nations of the world,is to be encouraged." "The First
Minister, Jack McConnell, is quite happy to promote a greater political
say for Scotland in the EU, just so long as it is done through the Committee
of the Regions, thereby helping the EU's aim of the regionalisation
of the member states and the gradual destruction of "But as New
Labour's flag bearer in Scotland, he cannot afford to encourage anything
which might lead Scots to believe they deserve more than just the symbols
of nationhood. For that reason the Executive will continue to make use
of Sewel motions, thereby depriving the Scottish "As the Saltire becomes more evident in public places and much more evident in the public consciousness of Scots as Scotland's flag, the demands to make St Andrew's day special, will increase. But in time, Scots will come to recognise that St Andrew's day will only be really special when it becomes the day on which they celebrate Scottish independence." (See http://www.standrewsdayrally.com/ for further details) 02/11/04 The English can have Continental Time if they want "The suggestion by Kent MP Nigel Beard that that England and Wales move to Continental Time has caused some consternation in Scotland," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson of the Free Scotland Party. "Scotland should decide what it wants independent of any decision in England and Wales. Equally, why should England not do what suits it?" He continued, "If this change were implemented in Scotland this would mean workers and school children going to work in pitch black, hardly a prospect that parents would welcome." "Accidents would move from the evening to the morning with the darkness. Assessments of the probable impacts of the change that were in favour of change were no more than educated guesses. However, there was a Continental time experiment in Britain circa 1969-71. Due to fierce opposition at that time across Scotland and the North of England, Britain dropped Continental Time. It might be an option for England but not for Shetland or Scotland." 01/11/04 Jim Fairlie joins Free Scotland Party Jim Fairlie, former high profile member of the SNP has joined the Free Scotland Party, which advocates Independence for Scotland outwith the EU. "I am absolutely delighted that Jim Fairlie has decided to join the Free Scotland Party," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "I know that he is well respected in political circles, particularly among nationalists of whatever party persuasion." "Jim Fairlie must be about the most courageous and honest politician of his generation, how many other Scottish politicians resign from their political party on principle when they are the candidate in a very winnable seat. Jim did that when he resigned from the SNP on the Independence in Europe slogan when he would almost certainly have won the Perth constituency. " Jim Fairlie joined the SNP in 1955 aged 15. He is a founder member of Perth & East Perthshire CA, the only constituency where the SNP have contested every single general and by-election since1945. Perth & East Perthshire is now the Perth & Kinross seat. Jim has held every branch and constituency office at some time. He was the first SNP candidate to stand in local government elections in the constituency in 1966. Jim was on the National Executive Committee (NEC) in early 1970's and served continuously until he resigned party membership in 1990. He held various containerships and at different times was spokesman for housing, economics, social services and other issues. He was Vice Chairman for policy for 1979 to 1980, Deputy Leader and Senior Vice Chairman for 1980 to 1984. Jim contested parliamentary seats for the SNP in Dundee West, February 1974 and October 1974 and in 1979, Dunfermline West in 1982 and Perth & Kinross in 1987. Jim was re-selected to stand in the next General Election as PPC when he resigned in 1990 over party policy when many thought that Jim Fairlie would have won Perth & Kinross from the Tories. Jim Fairlie said, "Why join a party now? When I first left the SNP my intention was to take the arguments about the EU into the public domain, without having the restraints of party loyalty. I felt the debate was too important to be shelved because the SNP had decided to adopt its Independence in Europe line, and quite rightly, expected its senior members to adhere to the party policy. I hoped the SNP would change, as many members at that time insisted to me that it would." "I have always missed the involvement in political debate, hence my frequent but irregular appearances in the letter columns of the press. I went along as part of an invited audience to a debate in the Scottish Parliament, run by The Institute for Citizenship, on the question of the EU and the proposition that if people knew more about the EU, they would support it more. The panel included Alyn Smith SNP MEP and I have never seen someone elected on an SNP ticket so totally ignorant of the history of the SNP and so ill equipped to argue the case for Scottish Nationalism. I came away from the meeting seething with frustration and decided to become involved again. " "I had hoped that in time, the SNP would present their case on the EU honestly but with the re-election of Alex Salmond as leader, that possibility is further away than ever. The SNP has invested far too much political capital in Independence in Europe to change now. I believe that Free Scotland is the only political party in Scotland whose commitment to the restoration of Scottish sovereignty is unconditional therefore my only alternative if I want to be involved in nationalist politics again is the Free Scotland Party." Brian Nugent said, "I think that getting Jim Fairlie back into active Scottish politics is quite a coup for the Free Scotland Party and while it will be of obvious benefit to the Free Scotland Party, I also believe that it will be a benefit in the longer term to Scottish politics in general. Various parties have approached him at various points but he did not agree with their policy approaches to Independence for Scotland and to membership of the European Union." "This will be a tremendous boost for Free Scotland party members. Setting up a new party (Free Scotland party was founded on the first of January, 2004) is a problematic exercise involving getting attention in the media and increasing membership. Jim Fairlie joining Free Scotland will increase Free Scotland's credibility with the media and that will help with recruitment too." "Jim will bring his immense experience to bear in discussions in the Free Scotland party on economics, industry, housing, economics, social services, foreign relations and other fields as required." "Free Scotland (http://www.freescotlandparty.org) wants a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to the people of Scotland. This means that Free Scotland does not accept that a devolved parliament is enough, a position that some nationalist parties seem to be moving towards, and we do not accept interference from the European Union (EU) or the UK parliament in Scottish affairs." "Scottish solutions to Scottish problems is an oft heard refrain which cannot be achieved in the EU, in the UK or in a devolved parliament situation. Unfettered Independence for Scotland is what Free Scotland wants and Jim Fairlie obviously agrees with the Free Scotland approach." "I believe that there are many members of other nationalist parties who are unhappy with their parties position on the devolved parliament and/or involvement with the EU. Are nationalist parties settling down with a devolved parliament or settling for a devolved parliament? Why did the SNP drop their policy on a referendum on membership of the EU on attaining independence? This policy was what kept me a member of the SNP for a long number of years but the policy was quietly dropped and most SNP members are unaware of this change." 30/10/04 Free Scotland to stand in General Election The Free Scotland Party announced today, Friday, that it will stand three candidates in the General Election which is forecast to take place in early 2005. The party which was founded on New Years Day, 2004, promotes Independence for Scotland and withdrawal from the European Union (EU). Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party said, “The General Election will be the first time that Free Scotland candidates will stand for election. We are in the process of establishing ourselves, putting finance together and increasing membership. Our ultimate aim is a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland! The word only in that statement is what is important, we want a government unfettered by Westminster and the UK, and a government unfettered by Brussels and the EU." He continued, “This means that Free Scotland does not accept that a devolved parliament is enough, a position that some nationalist parties seem to be moving towards, and we do not accept interference from the European Union (EU) or the UK parliament in Scottish affairs. Scottish solutions to Scottish problems is an oft heard refrain which cannot be achieved in the EU, in the UK or in a devolved parliament situation." “Free Scotland want a 3 question referendum held on the EU Constitution, the euro and membership of the EU. Even parties that are members of the EU Supporters Club should welcome a three question referendum. Let us find out what voters really think about the EU. Free Scotland feel that the outcome would be the opposite of what the EU Supporters Club would want!” “Free Scotland would campaign for a No vote on the constitution, a No vote on the Euro and a Yes vote on withdrawal from the EU.” “The EU is destroying Scottish Fishing with a cull of fish and Scottish fishermen with the successful fisheries in the North Sea in Norway, Faeroes and Iceland, those not run under EU restrictions. The EU promotes species quota cuts for Scottish boats but at the same time increases Danish industrial fishing. Fishing is going the way of Scottish Steel. The EU decided that there was too much steel production in the EU. The UK decided that Scottish Steel would be sacrificed and Gartcosh and Ravenscraig were closed.” “Why stay members of a club that is against Scottish interests? Free Scotland is for withdrawal from the EU and from the UK for the very positive reasons that we need Scottish solutions to Scottish problems decided in Scotland by governments elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland.” “The Free Scotland Party started life as The Scottish Party at the start of this year, however, the name was not sanctioned for electoral use by the Electoral Commission. Free Scotland Party was chosen by the membership from a long list of potential names as the new name and is now registered to take part in elections in Scotland." 29/10/04 EU Constitution signing farce Leaders of EU countries are meeting on Friday to sign up to the EU constitution at a time when EU voters see the EU increasingly as an irrelevance with the ongoing delay in appointing a Commission further proving that the EU is bureaucratic, top heavy and unworkable says Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "The constitution is the play thing of the political elite that inhabits Brussels. When Tony Blair decided to hold a referendum on the constitution in Britain, he was roundly condemned for giving voters the chance to voice their opinion. The last thing that the EU feels it needs or wants is input from voters.” Britain, Ireland, Denmark, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Spain, Portugal and the Czech Republic are all putting the convention to a referendum. France is reportedly mulling over a similar move. Any one country voting against the Constitution should see the end of the Constitution. “In June voters in the EU showed by falling turn out how unpopular the EU is with voters. Some voters started backing in increasing numbers euro sceptical parties or parties that want to withdraw completely. Political institutions only have credibility from how they are supported not from luxurious buildings or pictures of the political great and good smiling. The EU is losing credibility fast.” “The constitution gives further powers to the EU institution and moves the EU ever closer to the United States of Europe.” “The Free Scotland Party says hold a three question referendum; one question on the EU Constitution, another question on the Euro, and a further question on membership of the EU. Even parties that are members of the EU Supporters Club should welcome a three question referendum. Let us find out what voters really think about the EU. Free Scotland feel that the outcome would be the opposite of what the EU Supporters Club would want!” 19/09/04 Scottish Parliament building: Overdue, Overpriced but Underpowered! "The building is ready but the politics are not," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "Whatever the merits or demerits of the architecture, whoever is to blame or not to blame for the delay and the price over run, the fact of the matter is that, as Tony Blair said, the Scottish Parliament has all the powers of an English Parish Council!" He continued, "How can a First Minister of a self respecting parliament be at the beck and call of a parliament elsewhere? Is the total of Mr McConnell's ambition to be someone's message boy? How often has the Labour Party in the Scottish Parliament had no opinion on a policy until it had checked up with it's bosses in London?" "Voters in Scotland deserve better. The building in Edinburgh is no more than a token parliament restricted as it is by reserved powers being reserved in Westminster where all the major decisions are made. Scotland needs a parliament to govern Scotland not to administer for England. Time for the MSPs to get off their knees and display some political ambition and go for an Independent Scotland with a government elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland!" 03/09/04 Independence or Independence in Europe (article for SI, Scots Independent) The argument for Independence in Europe is put that Scotland will fare better in the shared sovereignty that the European Union represents That might make sense if it were not for the experience of almost 300 years of shared sovereignty that is Scotland trapped in the UK. The Scottish National Party (SNP) was formed to get Scotland out of the UK shared sovereignty trap. The logic is/was that Scotland as a nation is different from the rest of the UK, that Scottish problems require Scottish solutions, that Scotland’s 5 million folk will always lose out to the 50+ million in the rest of the UK, that a Scottish government should be elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland. Stands the SNP where it did? Independence is an easily understood concept for voters and activists. Just what does Independence in Europe mean? I have asked SNP members all the way through the ranks from branch activists to an MEP to explain it to me. I remain baffled. More worryingly, so are voters. With Independence in Europe, will Scotland’s 5 million folk not always lose out to the 400+ million in the rest of the EU and how can it be argued that a Scottish government would only be answerable to voters in Scotland when SNP spokesperson talk about shared sovereignty? The recent Rowntree Trust survey showed that 73% of Scottish voters look favourably on the SNP, yet not favourably enough to vote for the party. Mike Russell in his election leaflet wrote that the SNP should 'break down the barriers that stop so many of our fellow citizens from actively supporting us'. One glaring impediment to voting SNP is the Independence in Europe slogan. Why tag on support for an unpopular, bureaucratic and corrupt organisation like the EU to the primary aim of Independence for Scotland? Fergus Ewing in his leaflet states that 'we must remain a broad church'. A broad church that excludes those who would vote for Independence but cannot bring themselves to support the EU tag on. Has anyone at leadership level ever wondered why so many former activists have either drifted into apathy or out of the party all-together? A hopeful sign is that not one of the SNP leadership election candidates used the Independence in Europe slogan in their election material. Drop the EU, promote unencumbered Independence for Scotland! 03/09/04 Independence in Europe slogan millstone for SNP winners Salmond and Sturgeon "The news of the election of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon will give a temporary boost to the SNP but in the long term a party that continues to obscure it's message of Independence for Scotland with support for the European Union will continue it's slide in popularity, and deservedly so," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "Not one of the contenders in the SNP leadership and deputy leadership contests used the Independence in Europe slogan in the election material posted out to SNP members. A glaring omission one would have thought or a subconscious acknowledgment that the Independence in Europe slogan has been costing the SNP in terms of lost membership, lost votes and the illogical positions that SNP spokesperson find themselves having to defend." "A Rowntree Trust survey recently showed that 73% of Scottish voters look favourably on the SNP, yet most do not vote for the party. Free Scotland would say that one glaring impediment to voting SNP is the Independence in Europe slogan. The SNP should break away from the barriers that stop so many of our fellow citizens from actively supporting Independence. Why tag on support for an unpopular, bureaucratic and corrupt organisation like the EU to the primary aim of Independence for Scotland?" "The Independence movement and the SNP are no longer one and the same. There are so many options for voters who want to vote for Independence, the SNP, Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, need to make the SNP relevant again. Time to drop the EU!" 17/08/04 SNP leadership contenders 'drop' Independence in Europe "Not one of the 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," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, "a remarkable commission or a sign of things to come?" He continued, "it is surely significant that not one out of six contenders in the election has used the Independence in Europe slogan. This must be a recognition 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?" "Mike Russell said recently that the contest should be about ideas. Fergus Ewing has taken this further in his election leaflet asking for 'A review of our approaches to the key issues of ... Europe' and stating elsewhere in the leaflet that 'we must remain a broad church'." "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." "Free Scotland would advise the the SNP that 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." "Mike Russell in his leaflet writes that the SNP should 'break down the barriers that stop so many of our fellow citizens from actively supporting us'. 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'. Free Scotland says that this nonsense does not wash anymore with voters. They only have to look at the example of Scotland trapped in the UK for 300 years of shared sovereignty to see why we 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." "The new SNP leader and deputy leader have to drop the slogan to make the SNP relevant again!" 23/07/04 Free Scotland welcomes Peter Mandelson appointment to EU commission The Free Scotland Party has welcomed the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the UK nominated commissioner to the EU. "The Free Scotland Party is delighted that such an unpopular and disgraced politician has been put in the this position, the front man for the EU in the UK! You have to wonder about the motives of the Prime Minister in nominating him. With one incomprehensible appointment, Tony Blair has probably won the referendum on the the EU constitution for the No side", said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "Given the number of MPs and advisors in the Labour party queuing to criticise Peter Mandelson and, by implication, Tony Blair for making the appointment, Peter Mandelson is deeply unpopular within his own party never mind across the UK." "The governments of Europe select politicians from their own domestic ranks who then go on to run an office in the Commission. They generally appear as politicians past their best, Neil Kinnock and Chris Patten were the previous UK EU commissioners who fit that bill perfectly, who are given a tidy sinecure as a reward for past services rendered." " The only justification for Mandelson being appointed is that the job has been kept in house, New Labour in house. Most voters will react badly to this jobs for the boys approach. It took Mrs Thatcher and the Tories 18 years to become arrogant and overbearing, Tony Blair and New Labour got there much quicker." The Free Scotland Party is asking for a three question referendum. One question on the constitution, one on the Euro and one on membership of the EU and would ask for No answers to all three questions. 17/07/04 Open letter to candidates in the SNP leadership election The Free Scotland Party has written to the candidates in the SNP leadership election to ask them to consider a radical policy shift, dropping the Independence in Europe slogan. "The SNP have got themselves in a bind tagging Independence onto enthusiasm for an organisation, the EU, that voters are becoming increasingly disenchanted with," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "It is time to drop a slogan that is becoming a hindrance to the overall aim of the party and let voters in Scotland decide in a referendum on membership of the EU upon gaining Independence!" Open letter follows - 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 did not mention 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 21/06/04 Labour against a Superstate The Free Scotland Party has written to Jack McConnell, First Minister of the Scottish Executive, to ask him to clarify where the Scottish Executive stands on the formation of a Labour against a Superstate group by Labour MPs at Westminster. Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, said, "Labour against a Superstate say they will campaign against the EU Constitution because the constitution if accepted would hand further power to Brussels and would lead to a superstate centred round Brussels." "The Scottish Executive need to decide whether to support the corrupt, bureaucratic European Union becoming ever more powerful or deciding that it is time to call a halt to the onwards march to an EU superstate." "Free Scotland is proposing a three-question referendum with one question on acceptance of the EU constitution, a second question on entry to the Euro and a third question on membership of the EU." Britain, Ireland, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain are all to have referendum on this hugely important issue. Any one country voting against the Constitution should see the end of the Constitution. 17/06/04 Independence in Europe in tatters "It is time for the SNP to abandon their Independence in Europe slogan given the rebuff suffered by the SNP at the hand of voters throughout Scotland at the EU elections last Thursday," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, "and get back to advocating a simple, clear message of Independence for Scotland uncluttered by involvement in the European Union." "The SNP had been trying to beat Labour and take first place in Scotland but despite the worst Labour result in Scotland since 1918, the SNP barely held on to second spot with less than 20% of the vote from the Tories who were having their worst performance in Britain since 1832."
"Given general disillusionment with the EU across all parties, all party members and all voters, witness the increase in euro sceptic parties across Europe, the increase in the UKIP vote across Britain and a UKIP increase of 5.4% in Scotland, it must be time for the SNP to question the logic of adding a secondary and divisive element to its primary aim of Independence."
"The SNP's percentage went down by 7.5% and their vote dropped by over 37,000, Independence in Europe is an illogical slogan that is costing the SNP votes. Independence is a simple, clear message, time for the SNP to get back to that."
15/06/04 Voters across EU wake up to EU creeps "Voters across the European Union woke up to the EU in the recent elections," said Brian Nugent, Free Scotland Party spokesperson. "They either stayed at home or started backing in increasing numbers euro sceptical parties or parties that want to withdraw completely." "Across the EU more voters than ever stayed at home with turnout at only 44.6%. The ten new member states averaged only 28.7% with Slovakia the worst at 20%, and Poland only just better at 21%. EU officials had said before the elections that a turn out below 50% would be unfortunate. What the low turn outs prove is that the creep towards a federal super state is not supported by ordinary voters." "Scotland's turnout went up from 24.8% to 30.7% and across the UK the turnout increased from 24.6% to 38.2% which could be down to holding the local elections in England and Wales on the same day and the emergence of the UKIP as a major vote taker." "The SNP trying to be EU supporters but at the same time coming over sceptic over the Common Fisheries Policy issue does not ring true and voters saw through this and voted for other parties." "In Britain and the rest of the EU voters have seen through the EU with the election of 12 UKIP MEPs, in Sweden 3 June List MEPs, in Poland the League of Polish Families gaining 17% of the vote the polish Self Defence party gaining 12.3%, in Holland 2 MEPs elected for the Europa Transparant anti corruption policy and the re-election in Austria of Hans Peter Martin an Independent and anti corruption candidate." 11/06/04 Dutch EU results strike blow against Corruption in EU The Free Scotland Party has written to congratulate Paul van Buitenen of the Europa Transparant party in Holland to congratulate them on winning two seats in the Dutch EU elections held on Thursday. Europa Transparant campaigns against EU corruption. Holland has defied the EU Commission by publishing the results of their elections yesterday, despite orders not to publish them, and the threat that they would drag the Netherlands before the European Court of Justice if they yet did so. Paul van Buitenen is the whistle blower who famously exposed the huge fraud in the EU in 1999. He was suspended and fired, although his speaking out did cause the fall of the EU Commission of Jacques Santer in 1999. Free Scotland spokesperson, Brian Nugent, said, "This is a significant blow against EU corruption and should be welcomed across every EU country." "Free Scotland has been arguing that corruption is condoned or ignored by the EU Commission, most EU parliament members, the EU bureaucracy and it would seem, by their lack of comment, by the Scottish parties who stood in the EU elections." "Corruption in the EU is institutionalised on a grand scale. 5 years on from Jacques Santer and corruption is even higher at £1.8 billion. No one in the EU is suggesting that the Commission should resign. Why not? Corruption is out of control with a reported increase to 3,440 in cases of corruption." "The accounts of the EU have not been signed off for the 9th year in a row! The Court of Auditors in its report on the 2002 budget said that 91% of the budget was either riddled with errors or could not be verified.” “The EU can not clean up corruption and has learnt to live with institutionalised corruption!” “The only folk in the EU who are being pursued are the whistle blowers who take a huge risk with their careers as they are marginalized, demoted, harassed into resigning or sacked. Rather than the fraudsters, it is the whistle blowers who get persecuted.” “The EU gravy train rolls on and who in the EU cares? Well, Dutch voters, at least, care and Europa Transparant can bring this issue to the fore front and keep it there!” Europa Transparant won 2 seats, having only been formed this year, a remarkable achievement. Dutch commentators agreed that Europa Transparant accounted for most of the higher turnout in the Netherlands, from a 1999 figure of 29.9% to 39.1% yesterday and that the votes for this party were a significant protest against EU and corruption. Paul van Buitenen
commented that his party had not achieved this result through loads
of money, for there had been no campaign because he did not have any
money to spend. He concluded that any success was due solely to the
message he had sent out, and which had been well Van Buitenen now returns to Brussels as an MEP and will aspire to become a member of the Budget Audit Commission, and fight corruption within the EU directly. The established parties in the Netherlands have reacted in shock to Europa Transparant results. The VVD (Tories/Liberals) have already concluded that they should become more Euro sceptic. Their party leader, Jozias van Aertsen, has publicly announced that his party will most likely support voting against the the European Constitution. 04/06/04 The Case for Abstaining The Free Scotland
Party is calling on voters to consider the case for Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party, said, “Why are the political parties not discussing institutionalised corruption in the EU, the undemocratic decision-making processes in the EU, the steady progress towards a federal super state and the destruction of the Scottish Fishing fleet?” He continued, “We
do get to elect MEPs. However, the European Union “The Council
of Ministers is at the top of the EU political food chain. Then there
is the Commission that really runs the EU for the Council of “Worryingly,
the EU will have total control over fishing and other aspects “What do MEPs
actually do? Ian McWhirter in the Herald says that their “If the organisation
is not worth supporting maybe the parties are. “Iraq is a
huge issue and should be high on the political agenda but why is “Most importantly,
political parties are being fundamentally dishonest in their promises
to deal with the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) after the EU "The CFP is
a matter for the Council of Ministers and the Commission, the unelected
and virtually untouchable commissioners. The CFP cannot be “Other than Winnie Ewing, can anyone name a current or even recent MEP? I defy anyone to come up with a more anonymous group of politicians.” “The European Union (EU) delivers over 50% of the legislation that becomes law in Scotland and Britain regardless of the Westminster or Edinburgh parliaments.” “In 1999, across Scotland 3 voters out of 4 voters ignored the EU elections, Glasgow Shettleston boasted the lowest turn out at 15.7% with Galloway & Upper Nithsdale highest at 32.3 with the Scottish average at 24.8%. Voters were unenthusiastic last time round and there seems little sign that the election campaigns are inspiring voters this time round.” “There is,
of course, a long list of reasons why you should exercise your “But, you
also have the right, if you feel that the organisation is not worth
supporting or the parties are not worth supporting or the candidates
“Having spent
most of my political life trying to get people to take an interest in
politics and to get them out to vote I find myself in the uncomfortable
position of arguing for voters to abstain but the EU is just * Ian McWhirter heckle quote, Herald, 31/03/2004 01/06/04 MEPs can not change CFP Responding to an EU election campaign piece on Radio Shetland tonight, Brian Nugent, spokesman for the Free Scotland Party, said, "political parties are being fundamentally dishonest in their promises to deal with the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) after the EU elections." "Whoever is elected from whatever party, those MEPs will be part of a toothless parliament that can not alter EU policy. The CFP is a matter for the Council of Ministers and the Commission who run the EU on behalf of the Council of Ministers. The CFP can not be changed by MEPs. The Council of Ministers and the Commissioners have shown little interest in changing the CFP and the results of the elections in some obscure EU back water, like Scotland, are unlikely to cause any more than passing interest." "Political parties should be honest about what MEPs actually do. Iain MacWhirter in the Herald said that their function is to heckle. They get 90 seconds to make comment on issues before the legislation from the Commission is passed. MEPs do not elect a government, they do not elect the members of the Commission. MEPs are there to provide a veneer of democracy to a fundamentally undemocratic organisation." "While the CFP is bad enough, even more worrying is that the EU will have total control over fishing and other aspects of economic life in Scotland under the proposed constitution." "The Free Scotland Party would have discussed EU issues on the basis that withdrawal from the EU is the only way to stop the destruction of the Scottish Fishing fleet, to deal with institutionalised corruption in the EU, the undemocratic decision making processes in the EU and the steady progress towards a federal super state." "In 1999, at the last EU elections, in Orkney & Shetland there was a 23.5% turn out just below the Scottish average. Why should voters endorse such a corrupt, undemocratic, bureaucratic organisation that is dismissive of Scottish issues?" * Iain McWhirter quote, Herald, 31/03/2004 29/05/04 EU Institutionalised Corruption “The EU is a corrupt, get rich quick scheme subsidised by ordinary tax payers,” said Brian Nugent spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. “Corruption is condoned or ignored by the EU Commission, most EU parliament members, the EU bureaucracy and it would seem, by their lack of comment, by the Scottish parties standing the EU elections. Corruption in the EU is institutionalised on a grand scale, indeed corruption may be the only growth industry in the EU!” “In 1999, Jacques Santer the President of the European Commission and the entire Commission resigned because they could not get corruption under control.” “5 years on and corruption is even higher at £1.8 billion. That is identifiable fraud but who advertises fraudulent activity?” “No one in the EU is suggesting that the Commission should resign. Why not? The EU commissioner in charge of corruption is Neil Kinnock! Neil Kinnock is supposed to be in charge of the fight against corruption but it is out of control with a reported increase to 3,440 in cases of corruption, and few in the EU machine mention it.” “Andersons the accountants gladly signed off Enron accounts and then the whole can of worms fell apart. Accountants do sign off dubious accounts from time to time but the accounts of the EU have not been signed off for the 9th year in a row! No accountant dares risk his or her professional reputation on the EU. The Court of Auditors in its report on the 2002 budget said that 91% of the budget was either riddled with errors or could not be verified.” “How much condemnation does the EU need to have heaped upon it before it cleans up its act or is this a tacit admission that the EU can not clean up corruption and has learnt to live with institutionalised corruption!” “Before the EU parliament closed down for the elections, a plenary session was held on corruption in the EU parliament. Out of 626 MEPs only 25 turned up and the hardly earth shattering conclusion was that fraud is a bad thing! And that was the end of it.” “The only folk in the EU who are being pursued are the whistle blowers who take a huge risk with their careers as they are marginalized, demoted, harassed into resigning or sacked. Rather than the fraudsters, it is the whistle blowers who get persecuted.” "The EU has a record of shooting the whistle blower, a tactic adopted by Struan Stevenson, Conservative MEP, attacking Hans Peter Martin an Austrian Independent MEP who has alleged that 200 MEPs are involved in expense account fiddling, he claimed to know of 7200 instances of fraud.” "Struan, came over all shy when asked for his name by a radio reporter as he was signing in for a £180 daily allowance at the EU parliament, planning to leave almost immediately, said, '.... well that's something you'll have to find out.'" “Struan and the other MEPs are obviously struggling to get by. MEPs get £55,000 salary, £38,000 office expenses, £96,000 for secretarial expenses, £2,500 a year for travel on official business, £180 daily allowance, flat rate travel from home to EU parliament, although they can travel on low cost air lines and claim first class and a 20% premium added on for extraneous extras.” “There was a plan to replace this with basic pay of £6000 per month for all 626 MEPs with expenses claimed on receipts of what was actually spent but this was vetoed by the Germans because this was felt to be too generous!” “The EU gravy train rolls on and who in the EU cares?” 24/05/04 Scottish Fishing Potential, Regional Advisory Committees (RACs) "Look at Scottish Fishing trapped in the EU and all you can see are problems, and problems well into the future," said Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. He continued, "The only meaningful local control is Scottish Fishing grounds outwith the EU." "Look to Norway, Iceland and the Faeroes. They all have successful fisheries. None operate under EU regulations. They make the decisions for their fishing grounds." "Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) as proposed by the EU will continue to allow foreign fishing interests to make decisions in Scottish waters. Where is the local control in that?" "The EU has been issuing regulations whose aim was supposed to be about conservation but has had the opposite effect, culling fish, fishermen and fishing communities." "Who would be more interested in a viable long term fishing industry here-today-gone-tomorrow politicians or fishing communities? Fishermen would work to maintain a vibrant, viable industry well into the future. The Free Scotland Party says take the politicians out of fishing with control of fishing handed over to fishermen’s organisations and fish processors organisations." "You have to ask where is the political support for Scottish Fishermen? Scottish Fishing is being sacrificed for the EU common good just as Scottish Steel was in the past." "The UK government will not stand up for Scottish fishing, as fishing in England is almost a non issue. UK governments of whatever colour, Labour, Tory or New Labour, have always seen fishing as expendable." "Talk from the SNP and Tories of withdrawing from the Common Fisheries Policy is pie in the sky wishful thinking. The SNP are not in a position to make good such an offer and the Tories, with a track record of deceit on fishing, would have to win the next UK general election." "Recently, Robin Harper of the Scottish Greens backed EU control of Scottish Fishing. This came only days after reports of hundreds of seabirds are being washed up starved to death because Danish industrial fishing is clearing the sea of sand eels with the backing of the EU!" "Liberal Democrat and New Labour, Scottish Executive allies, both carry out EU and UK fishing policies with enthusiasm, they appear willing to ground Scottish Fishing down into the dust. Liberal Democrats and New Labour are both talking about reforming the CFP, a pathetic and undeliverable sop that is already too late for the many scrapped Scottish Fishing boats." "Why stay members of clubs that are against Scottish interests? The Free Scotland Party (http://freescotlandparty.org) is for withdrawal from the EU and from the UK for the very positive reasons that we need Scottish solutions to Scottish problems decided in Scotland by a government elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland." 15/05/04 EU Elections: What EU Elections? The Free Scotland Party is accusing the parties of standing in the EU elections of dodging the real issues involved in the EU elections. Brian Nugent, spokesman for the Free Scotland Party, said, "what are we to make of the EU election campaigns thus far? Not a single party is talking about the issues as they relate to the EU. Where is the talk of how to deal with institutionalised corruption in the EU, what about the undemocratic decision making processes of the EU and the steady progress towards a federal super state." "Labour have said little about the EU but they want to criticise the Tories on domestic UK issues, the Tories are talking about gaining power at the next domestic UK elections, the Liberal Democrats and the SNP are both wanting a referendum on Iraq. This is an election that politicians dare not speak about the real EU issues." "Voters will see through this and continue to abstain in huge numbers, if the politicians who mostly claim to be in favour of EU membership can find nothing about the EU to enthuse about, maybe it means that there is in fact nothing to enthuse about!" 15/05/04 Free Scotland Party and EU deposit "It is too early in the life of the Free Scotland Party to have party funds sufficient to meet the deposit for the EU election which is set at £5,000", said Brian Nugent, spokesman for the Free Scotland party. He continued, "Regrettably, Free Scotland will have to sit out this particular election but we have no intention of going away and will continue to campaign against the EU, institutionalised corruption in EU and the lack of of democracy at every level in EU including the charade that passes for a parliament." 09/05/04 EU Deposit public appeal The Free Scotland Party has launched a public appeal to try to raise the £5,000 needed for the deposit to put up candidates for the EU elections on June 10. The deadline for registering for the election is this Thursday the 13th of May. Details can be found on the Free Scotland Party web page (http://freescotlandparty.org). Brian Nugent spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party said, "Free Scotland feel that we have a unique policy position to promote in the EU elections but unfortunately, the election have come a bit too early in the life of the Free Scotland Party with membership gradually increasing but funds not yet able to carry the burden of a £5,000 deposit.” “The Free Scotland Party started this year on New Years Day with the aim of a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland. This would be achieved through Independence from the EU and Independence from the UK. Where is the logic in being independent from London but not from Brussels? Free Scotland would also support any referendum or measures to diminish the powers of the EU over Scottish life.” "Free Scotland would suggest a three question referendum; one question on the EU Constitution, another question on the Euro, and a further question on membership of the EU. We feel that all these questions need to be asked rather than avoided as New Labour have been trying to do from day 1." “Free Scotland feel that corruption is the major issue in the European Union, voters will be astonished to learn that accountants have not been able to bring themselves to sign off the EU annual accounts for all of nine years.” "Hans Peter Martin an Austrian MEP has highlighted over 7,000 possible corruption issues. Struan Stevenson MEP, number one on the Tory list has adopted the same approach as the EU to any corruption whistle blowers who are sidelined, marginalised, or harassed into leaving. Mr Stevenson has attacked Hans Peter Martin an Austrian MEP rather than deal with the issue of corruption.” "Another major issue for Free Scotland is Scottish Fishing. Free Scotland feels that long term, politicians should be kept out of Scottish Fishing. Let Scottish Fishermen and Scottish Fish Processors control Scottish waters, short term, the government should fund a temporary tie up scheme." "Scottish Fishermen must be more motivated to control and maintain a viable, long term industry just like the successful fisheries in the North Sea, not one of which is under the control of the EU. Remarkably, speaking on radio today Robin Harper of the Scottish Greens backed EU control of Scottish Fishing. This only days after reports of hundreds of seabirds are being washed up starved to death because Danish industrial fishing is clearing the sea of sand eels!” “Talk from the SNP of withdrawing from the Common Fisheries Policy but not from the EU is pie in the sky wishful thinking. EU fishing policies seem set up to destroy the Scottish Fishing industry with the compliance of UK and Edinburgh governments. What is the point of having fish in the sea but no Scottish fishermen left to fish?” “If Scotland is peripheral in the UK with 5 million folk to 56 million then how much more so with the EU’s enormous population now 400 plus million. We do not need to be part of the EU, look no further than Norway for a country blessed by much the same resources and many more logistical problems than Scotland but one of the richest countries in the world. Norway is independent and has twice voted against membership of the EU!” “Free Scotland are appealing to like minded voters across Scotland to help fund part or all of the party deposit. All the parties that support Independence for Scotland support membership of the EU, Free Scotland offers voters a true alternative for Scottish but we need their help to make a stand!” 30/04/04 EU corruption Brian Nugent spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party asks, "Why has Struan Stevenson, Conservative MEP, normally a politician who pushes himself to the front of the picture, suddenly become so shy?" "Sounding a bit like the schoolboy who was caught with his hand in the sweetie jar, Struan when asked for his name by a radio reporter when signing in for a £180 daily allowance at the EU parliament, planning to leave almost immediately, said, '....well that's something you'll have to find out.'" "The EU has a record of shooting the messenger when dealing with charges of corruption with whistle blowers sidelined, marginalised, or harassed into leaving. Mr Stevenson has adopted the same approach attacking Hans Peter Martin an Austrian MEP who has highlighted over 7,000 possible corruption issues." "Corruption is a major issue in the European Union, and this will be a major plank of the Free Scotland Party EU campaign. Voters will be astonished to learn that accountants have not been able to bring themselves to sign off the EU annual accounts for all of nine years and yet all Struan wants to do is shoot the messenger!" 19/04/04 Hold a 3 question referendum on the EU Constitution "A referendum on the EU is welcome, it is real a chance to re-invigorate Scottish voters", said Brian Nugent, spokesman for the Free Scotland Party, "but the wording of the question is crucial, it has to be clear. The Plain English should be given the task of setting the wording, certainly not the spinners in the Labour Party." "Free Scotland would suggest a three question referendum; one question on the EU Constitution, another question on the Euro, and a further question on membership of the EU." “Even parties that are members of the EU Supporters Club should welcome a three question referendum. Let us find out what voters really think about the EU. Free Scotland feel that the outcome would be the opposite of what the EU Supporters Club would want!” Prodi and Independence in Europe "Where now for the SNP and Independence in Europe?," asked Brian Nugent, spokesperson for the Free Scotland Party. "Independence in Europe was at best a meaningless slogan which no member at any level in the SNP, from branch member all the way up to and including MEP, could ever explain to me. To describe Independence in Europe as a policy was only ever wishful thinking which appears to have been blown out of the water by the comments of Romano Prodi, the EU President." "A bigger question than the SNP slogan is why should Scotland depend on the whim of EU officials?" "The SNP and others campaign for withdrawal from the UK and Free Scotland would support them in that but where is the logic in wanting to be part of an even bigger, undemocratic, corrupt union in which by force of numbers and geographical position means that Scotland must always be a peripheral after thought." Free Scotland is for Independence for Scotland and withdrawal from the EU. 16/04/04 Electoral Commission Registration of Free Scotland Party The Free Scotland
Party will be contesting the European Union elections Brian Nugent, spokesman
for Free Scotland says "we felt that there was a Free Scotland has completed the registration process with the Electoral Commission (see below) and as a legally recognised political party based in Scotland can now stand in Scottish, UK and EU elections. http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/regulatory-issues/regpoliticalpart 08/04/04 Apre-Launch Free Scotland Party Speaking after the national launch of the Free Scotland Party, Scotland’s newest political party, Brian Nugent said, “All the current political parties in Scotland that say they want Independence all support the European Union (EU) with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Where is the logic in being independent from London but not from Brussels?” “If you want out of the EU who could you vote for in an EU election? No one! Until Free Scotland was formed you were forced to vote for one of the European Union Supporters Club.” “The EU is destroying Scottish Fishing with a cull of fish and Scottish fishermen with the successful fisheries in the North Sea in Norway, Faeroes and Iceland, those not run under EU restrictions. What is the point of getting the fish stocks in Scottish waters back to sustainable levels and have no Scottish Fishing fleet to take advantage.” “Fishing is going the way of Scottish Steel. The EU decided that there was too much steel production in the EU. The UK decided that Scottish Steel would be sacrificed and Gartcosh and Ravenscraig were closed.” “The EU Supporters Club will talk about anything other than the endemic corruption in the EU. The accountants for the EU have refused to sign off the EU accounts for the ninth year in a row. Tax payers money will continue to be squandered by the EU.” “In 1999, Jacques Santer the President of the European Commission and the entire Commission resigned because they could not get corruption under control. Five years on and corruption is higher at £1.8 billion. That is identifiable fraud. Who advertises fraudulent activity? There is a reported increase in cases of corruption to 3,440. There is no suggestion that any of the Commission should resign this time round, why not?” “With five million in 56 million, Scotland is on the periphery of decision making in the UK. Five million in 300+ million in the EU and some parties talk about being at the centre of Europe, at the top table. Nonsense!” “Free Scotland is offering voters a true alternative, a party that wants out of the European Union.” “Do we need to be part of the EU? Look no further than Norway for an answer. A country blessed by much the same resources and many more logistical problems than Scotland but one of the richest countries in the world. In comparison to Scotland, Norway is independent and not in the EU. Norway has twice voted against membership of the EU!” “Why stay members of clubs that are against Scottish interests? Free Scotland is for withdrawal from the EU and from the UK for the very positive reasons that we need Scottish solutions to Scottish problems decided in Scotland by governments elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland.” Pre-Launch Free Scotland Party Free Scotland Party
Speaking ahead of the National Launch of Scotland’s newest political party, the Free Scotland Party, spokesman Brian Nugent, said, “the Free Scotland Party wants Independence for Scotland and withdrawal from the European Union meaning that decisions about Scotland and Scottish life will be made in Scotland without interference either from London or Brussels.” The Free Scotland Party is holding a public meeting to which all are welcome in the Beaufort Hotel, Inverness on Friday, 2nd April with a 7.30pm start to formally launch the Free Scotland Party. Brian Nugent said, “If like me you want a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland then there is no party currently that represents your political opinions. This is why the Free Scotland Party was formed.” “There are several parties that say they want Independence but none that want Independence unchecked by involvement in the European Union (EU). Where is the logic in being independent from London but not from Brussels?” “The Common Market as a trading organisation was just about acceptable but the EU is now moving step by step towards the United States of Europe. The Euro and the constitution are steps in the direction of the unification of the member states of the EU. If voters in Scotland want to go along that route that is their prerogative but the Free Scotland Party reserves the right to speak out and campaign against a process that will inevitably be to the detriment of Scotland.” “If Scotland is peripheral in the UK with 5 million folk to 56 million then how much more so with the EU’s enormous population. Voters in Scotland need look no further than the Fishing industry in Scotland to see how the EU looks after Scotland. Last years deal saw the Scottish fishing effort being cut back in the name of conservation but at the same time the Danish industrial fishing quota was increased. The consequence of the latest EU deal will be further cuts.” “The proposed EU constitution harmonises many powers into the centre of a corrupt, incompetent organisation and this is what all other the other parties, British and Scottish appear to support. The members of the EU Supporters Club should justify their enthusiasm for an organisation whose auditors can not bring themselves to sign off the EU accounts for nine, yes nine, years. You would not be a member of a social club on this basis so how can the European Union get away with it?” “Do we need to be part of the EU? Look no further than Norway for an answer. A country blessed by much the same resources but many more logistical problems than Scotland but one of the richest countries in the world. In comparison to Scotland, Norway is independent and has twice voted against membership of the EU!” “The Free Scotland Party has a number of targets, firstly to build up membership and funds and secondly to use the EU elections in June 2004 as a referendum on membership of the European Union. If you want Scotland Independent and to withdraw from the EU, come June you have no other choice!” 25/03/04 Free Scotland Party to be registered "Scotland's newest political party is in the process of getting registered with the Electoral Commission with a view to putting forward candidates in the EU elections due in June", said Brian Nugent of the Free Scotland Party. "The Free Scotland Party started life as The Scottish Party at the start of this year with the launch of a web site, http://thescottishparty.port5.com, however, the name was not sanctioned for electoral use by the Electoral Commission. Free Scotland Party was chosen by the membership from a long list of potential names as the new name." "Free Scotland has members across Scotland and indeed a contact in Canada so it is appropriate to describe the party as a national party, global might be pushing it a bit." "Free Scotland wants out of the UK and out of the EU. We want decisions about Scotland made in Scotland. With further depressing news today on the fishing front is there any other way forward for fishing and for Scotland?" Back
to Top of Page UK think tank doing down Scottish Fishing "Long term, keep politicians out of Scottish Fishing. Let Scottish Fishermen and Scottish Fish Processors control Scottish waters," says Brian Nugent of the Free Scotland Party. "Short term, let the government fund a tie up scheme. Scottish Fishermen were leading the way with voluntary conservation measures but that was not enough to satisfy EU politicians and now UK politicians. Scottish Fishermen must be more motivated to control and maintain a viable, long term industry." "No wonder Scottish Fishermen are reacting with fury to the latest blow to confidence of the Scottish Fishing fleet. The government think tank suggesting that there should be further cut backs in numbers of boats and in days at sea on top of the disastrous EU fishing deal makes you wonder if there is any political support for Scottish Fishermen anywhere with interference from the EU and now the British government and a Scottish Executive always willing to carry out their masters instructions." "What is the basis for the committees calculations, Scottish Fishermen dispute their calculations but if the UK government insists on further restrictions, let them fund a tie up scheme to maintain the Scottish Fishing industry until better times allow the boats back out to sea. What is the point of getting the fish stocks in Scottish waters back to sustainable levels and have no Scottish Fishing fleet to take advantage." "English fishing is all but destroyed but now Scottish Fishing is the target of a disinterested UK government, fishing simply is not an issue in England. The EU and the UK are playing games with the livelihoods of Scottish fishing communities." "The way forward for Scottish Fishermen is for Scotland to get out of the EU and join the Faroes and Iceland as successful North Sea countries running their own fisheries. Wait long enough and the cull of Scottish Fishermen by the EU and the UK will be complete!" Back
to Top of Page Take the Politicians out of fishing The Scottish Party has hit out at the Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) findings into the future of fishing in Scotland, asking why they give equal blame to European scientists, fishermen and policy makers for the grave difficulties being experienced by the whitefish sector. Brian Nugent of the Scottish Party (http://thescottishparty.port5.com) says that what is needed is to take the politicians out of the fishing equation. There are successful fisheries in the North Sea but none of them operate under European Union (EU) control. The EU’s regulations on quotas are culling fish stocks rather than preserving them. Fish species don’t know that they are not supposed to swim with other species so that when the wrong species are caught otherwise perfectly good fish have to be thrown dead overboard. Insane or wicked or both, it is hard to decide. Leaving the CFP would be a useful first step to leaving the EU completely but the real way forward for the fishing industry in Scotland is for fishermen’s and fish processors organisations to manage the fishing grounds themselves without interference from politicians at Brussels, UK or Scottish level. Fishing stocks are a finite resource but who would be more motivated to maintain fishing stocks than fishing communities whose livelihoods depend on there being fish well into the future or here today gone tomorrow politicians? Give total control of fishing now to the fishermen’s and fish processors organisations, all other attempts from out with the industry at control have and are failing miserably. The Scottish Party has also slammed the Scottish Executive after news that the Scottish Executive has decided that it will enforce the discredited, unworkable EU fishing agreement which it is agreed is detrimental to Scottish fishing. This will be greeted with dismay in fishing communities. Members of the Scottish Executive who represent fishing communities should be held to account. They have to make their minds up if they have any interest in the fishing effort in their constituencies or if they are in parliament to represent the European Union Supporters club. 21/01/004 Fishing Policy “Take the politicians out of the fishing equation”, says Brian Nugent of the Scottish Party (http://thescottishparty.port5.com). “The European Union (EU) and their attempts to regulate fishing in the North Sea are destroying a valuable resource that Scotland and Shetland can ill afford to lose.” “The EU has been issuing regulations whose aim was supposed to be about conservation but has had the opposite effect, culling fish and fishermen. There are successful fisheries in the North Sea but none of them operate under the EU.” “The Scottish Party’s radical proposal is that the fishermen’s organisations and the fish processors should manage the fishing grounds themselves without interference from politicians at Brussels or Scottish level.” “Fishermen can not wait for the EU to come up with a sensible fishing policy, they should have total control of fishing policy in an exclusive area 200 miles off the Scottish shore and share control of other grounds with other nations by agreement.” “Fishermen know that they have a finite resource, they only have to look to the Newfoundland Grand Banks to see what can happen to fishing stocks. In Shetland, SHOAL was already ahead of the conservation game with innovative ideas for maintaining fish stocks, fishermen could not make a worse jobs of maintaining fish stocks than the EU.” “Other issues such as species quota, stock, by catch, mesh sizes should be under their control too." “Total control of fishing by fishermen’s organisations and fish processors organisations would mean that fishermen would be in control of their own destiny. Fishermen would have a big stake in the future of their industry and would work to maintain a vibrant, viable industry well into the future. That has to be better than being part of an industry that is out of control because of outside interference and bungling!” 31/12/03 The Scottish Party Scotland’s newest political party is to be launched in Shetland on New Years Day 2004 with the opening of the http://thescottishparty.port5.com/ web site. Brian Nugent, founder member of the Scottish Party, says, “There is no party that represents my political opinions. I want a government in Scotland elected by and answerable only to voters in Scotland.” “There are several parties that say they want Independence but none that want Independence unchecked by involvement in the European Union (EU). Where is the logic in being independent from London but not from Brussels?” “The Common Market as a trading organisation was just about acceptable but the EU is now moving step by step towards the United States of Europe. The Euro, the constitution are steps in the direction of the unification of the member states of the EU. If voters in Scotland want to go along that route that is their prerogative but the Scottish Party reserves the right to speak out and campaign against a process that will inevitably be to the detriment of Scotland.” “If Scotland is peripheral in the UK with 5 million folk to 56 million then how much more so with the EU’s enormous population. Voters in Scotland need look no further than the Fishing industry in Shetland and Scotland to see how the EU looks after Scotland. Last years deal saw the Scottish fishing effort being cut back in the name of conservation but at the same time the Danish industrial fishing quota was increased.” “The proposed EU constitution harmonises many powers into the centre of a corrupt, incompetent organisation and this is what all other the other parties, British and Scottish appear to support.” “Do we need to be part of the EU? Look no further than Norway for an answer. A country blessed by much the same resources and many more logistical problems than Scotland but one of the richest countries in the world. In comparison to Scotland, Norway is independent and has twice voted against membership of the EU!” “The Scottish Party has a number of targets, firstly to build up membership and funds and secondly to use the EU elections in June 2004 as a referendum on membership of the European Union. If you want Scotland Independent and to withdraw from the EU, you have no other choice!” Brian Nugent is 51, a lecturer in FE, married with three children, oldest 10. He resigned from SNP in September 2003, because policy on referendum on membership of EU dropped by SNP, would have been a member for 30 years in February 2004, stood at various levels Scottish Parliamentary Highlands and Islands list 2003, Westminster elections 1997 Coatbridge and Chryston. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
