The Scottish Independence Referendum: Confusion, Frustration and Disappointment.

The Scottish independence referendum has turned into a farce. The lack of empirical information, the claims and counter claims, most unsubstantiated, and the constant mudslinging (and egg slinging) has seen the politicking and campaigning descend into something akin to a scouse wedding where the bride’s family are lifelong Liverpool supporters and the bridegrooms family are all Evertonians, ( if you’re confused, look it up).

I was, at first, quite keen for the Scots to throw off the shackles of the Tories and chart their own destiny until I was confronted with the constant whining of The First Minster of Scotland, Alec Salmond, who’s campaigning tactics seem to be a mixture of a Little Scotlander calling the No campaigners liars, no matter what they say, blaming England for every slight Scotland has ever received over the last 1000 years, bullying journalists, and shouting down anyone who has the temerity to have a point of view contrary to his own. It has been commented on that there are very few No posters and signs up. I think this may have something to do with a fear of having a brick put through your window, due to the level of enmity being generated by a Yes campaign lead by Salmond.

The one thing missing from the discussion is any cogent or coherent, easily accessible facts that would give anybody any idea what independence will mean to Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom, how long a complete separation will take and how much it will cost.

I am amazed that no one has produced a document clearly explaining the steps to be taken towards independence and the costs of setting up separate government and non-governmental institutions, what happens with the BBC, and of course the economic implications involved.

So with less than two weeks to go, nobody knows what currency Scotland will use, what happens to the armed forces, (there are currently six Scottish battalions with the British army. Are the soldiers in these battalions re-branded as mercenaries as they will be fighting for a foreign army?). What is the fate of the nuclear deterrent currently housed at Faslane? What happens to the oil in the North Sea (surely the UK are entitled to some level of recompense considering it was UK taxes that was invested into the industry)? What happens to the navy ships currently under construction in Scottish shipyards and the jobs tied up in that industry? How will the Civil Service be divided up, likewise the BBC (I hope they get the cultural grotesque Clarkson and his intellectually arrested co-hosts on Top Gear, I really do)? What are the governmental and civil implications as departments like Work and Pensions, The Inland Revenue and the Health department will be fragmented? Who bears the cost for setting up a Scottish DVLA (Driver Vehicle Licensing Agency) and a Scottish Passport Agency? Where does the expertise come from to set up a new nation state, who provides it, and who pays for it? What will be the border restrictions? Will Scottish people, currently living in Britain and who were not given a vote in the referendum, have to take on dual nationality? The questions are many and varied and if there were just a few answers outstanding, that would be understandable. But there are no answers being offered up by either the Yes campaign or the No campaign. It is utter confusion.

The currency question has turned into a farce. The No campaign have said no union will be available, whereas the Yes campaign say there will be. Not a very grown up discourse is it. That is the extent of the information made available to the voters. Except, of course, Salmond’s ridiculous threat that if Scotland is not allowed a currency union with the rest of the UK, it will default on their share of the national debt. How pathetic is that? What a way to start as a newly independent nation. Salmond treats Westminster like a bunch of recalcitrant and obstreperous politicians who, once independence has been gained, will suddenly be sprinkled with commonsense fairy dust and comply with all his wishes. The people of Britain have a right to be consulted over any currency union if Scotland does become independent. We should not have to underwrite the debts of an independent sovereign state without having a say. After all, who would be happy if someone moved into the house next door, knocked on your door, and told you that they had taken out a large mortgage on the house and that you were the guarantor of the loan if they defaulted.

The No campaigns dissemination of information has been poor. It has been accused of being relentlessly negative, but that is understandable as their whole campaign is built around the message that independence would be a bad move for Scotland. But, at times, the No campaigns level of arrogance has been in direct proportion to their level of humility, and that attitude has not served them well, hence the closing polls. What the No campaign should have done is present a comprehensive manifesto of what independence will involve for Scotland and the UK, including costs, timelines and the implications involved to both Scotland and the rest of the UK. Instead their approach seems to be built around a generalised threat that if Scotland goes independent they will all be doomed. What they should have done is emphasised that if Scotland votes to remain in the Union things will still change with the introduction of new powers with Devo Max, greater tax raising powers and more direct control given over to the Scottish parliament. Instead they seem to be promoting, arrogantly, the status quo, as if Scotland will be happy with nothing changing. Looking at the polls, any fool can see that change is exactly what Scotland wants. It is whether it can be delivered better, either, inside or outside the Union that is being voted upon.

The No campaign has been shrouded in a mist of arrogance and complacency that should have been blown away months ago. This is demonstrated by Prime Minster David Cameron’s virtual detachment from the process, as if he either arrogantly accepts an easy victory or he is scared to open his mouth because he is aware that Alec Salmond will immediately leap on anything Cameron says, pointing out he is a privileged out of touch toff who has never had a proper job. Cameron is well aware that the Tories are hated in Scotland ( as well as many parts of the rest of the UK) and that the Tory brand is a toxic brand in Scotland, due to the legacy of Thatcher, a woman who presided over the destruction of communities and jobs in Scotland without an ounce of empathy. Cameron is well aware he has nothing positive to add to the conversation, which frankly is an indictment of the dysfunctional nature of British politics generally. To have a Tory Prime Minister, who is frightened to engage with large swathes of the electorate he presides over, demonstrates how Londoncentric the Tories are. Although his main fear must be the very strong chance that he will go down in history as the British Prime Minister who lost the Union.

The Yes campaigners are no better, with a distinct lack of information, but I suspect that may be because they realise that independence will bring many problems initially and if they enlightened the voters, it may scare the bejesus out of them. I think the Yes campaigners are hoping that the spirit of Braveheart and the chance of given the Sassenachs Tories a good kicking will get them over the line. They appear to be working on a short-term policy of sentiment rather than sense. With the closeness of the polls, those tactics seem to be working, although the news last weekend that the Yes vote may have moved ahead, may turn out to be counter-productive, as it may activate and energise the No vote, particularly those who considered not voting because they thought a No win was a foregone conclusion. The Yes vote may have shown its hand two weeks to early.

The Scottish Nationalist Party has not yet presented a single major policy that will help people in low income brackets and Salmond’s involvement in the deeply unpleasant and tawdry Donald Trump affair, where the Scottish Police Force seemed to be used as a private corporate militia against Scottish citizens is very unsettling. When you also consider that the only major policy the SNP has confirmed is a reduction in Corporation tax, it gives you an idea that SNP policy is not that much different from the current UK coalition government. The interests of corporations and the wealthy seemed to be at the top of Salmonds agenda as they are at the top of the UK Governments agenda. I do not think that Salmond is as keen to create a socialist nirvana in Scotland as many people in Scotland may hope and some may say that if Scotland does gain independence then surely there is no longer a need for a Scottish nationalist party. Alec Salmond himself is not particularly well liked in Scotland and has many critics who accuse him of being arrogant with a whiff of the would-be dictator about him. I think that if independence is secured, there may be many who would be happy to see the demise of Salmond and the Scottish National Party.

Personally I can’t wait for it to be over. I’m bored and fed up with it. I’m tired of being pestered by ‘celebs’ using the referendum as just a way of protecting their revenue streams or bolstering their image. The Yes campaign seem to wheel out a never ending supply of old 80’s rockers and why the No campaign would think people in Scotland would be swayed by a letter signed by millionaire and multi millionaire ‘celebs and B-list television presenters, really does beggar belief. Why would anybody, thinking of voting Yes, give a damn what television presenter Dan Snow thinks, especially as he is also the son-in-law of the Duke of Westminster, one of the richest men in Britain, and the son of another television presenter, Peter Snow (nice to see nepotism is alive and well in the television industry). A fine example of a privately educated toff and establishment member patronising the ‘plebs. I mean, how out of touch can you be? Or, on a similar theme, another musician, Mick Jagger, who could not name Britain as his main home because of tax avoidance arrangements, deems himself important enough to  preach to the unwashed masses. Why the No campaign considered a posh bloke patronising the Scots or an ageing rocker doing likewise, would be a winning tactic, I do not know.

It is also interesting how it is difficult to name any Scottish celebrity that has come out in favour of remaining in the Union. I get the distinct feeling that to do so would kill a career in an instant. And that is a salient point. It is not the mechanics of setting up an independent nation that may prove damaging to a new Scotland, any difficulties that present themselves can and will be eventually overcome. It is what effect the result may have on the people living in Scotland, considering the level of antagonism and hostility, direct or via the internet and the media, which seems to have been ever present between the two sides. It will serve nobody in Scotland any purpose if it returns to a 21^st  Century equivalent of the clan feuds, with conspiracy theories abounding, that if things are not going well, or the Yes campaign lose, it’s because of the dark hand of the English Sassenachs, forever hovering in the background.

I think that any vote placed in two weeks time will be based on a mixture of hope, heart and gut instinct rather than any fact based rationale and personally I do not blame them because they have been desperately let down by the political classes who have hedged, evaded, prevaricated and dissembled the truth into oblivion.

Considering the constitutional, political and civil upheaval a yes vote will create, I find it impossible to see how the target of March 2016 will be met.

I just hope that if the Scots do vote for independence, the price of shortbread and Highland Toffee doesn't soar due to the imposition of tariffs applied to exports from countries outside the European Union.

Impostor ?

The Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, holds a weekly radio phone-in. On last week’s he was interrogated by a 9 yr old boy about the governments free school meals policy that has just been implemented. Due to the boys’ intricate grasp of the facts and his articulation, it has been suggested that it may have been an impostor posing as a 9 yr old boy.

Having listened to the call, it is obvious he is a fake and he is just saying things brighter people tell him to say.

As for the 9 yr old,......... who knows?

(Courtesy of Ghostwiper)

.

Returning Jihadi’s.

Message to the people who are calling for the passports of returning British Jihads to be removed. I think you believe that British nationals having their passports removed are also stripped of their nationality and therefore made stateless, treated like outlaws, left to wander the world.

It doesn't. All it means is that they are unable to travel abroad. In fact it achieves the exact opposite of what I think you believe will, and wish, to happen. They have to stay in Britain. We get to keep them.

Now it’s been explained I doubt you’re quite as keen or happy. That’s your fault for being stupid morons.

Royal baby.

It’s great news about the forthcoming birth of another royal baby. Now the media and press can drop all those depressing news items about Russia’s aggressive expansionism into Ukraine or the continuing plight of the Palestinians or all those nasty beheadings and massacres’s committed by Islamic State, and fill the airwaves and newsprint with fawning articles about the forthcoming happy event, that are only of any real interest to people in the Home Counties or to the county set. Super.

“Freedom’s just another word for having nothing to lose”

( Kris Krisstofferson)