Food For Thought

Alex Salmond has said that, in the event of a hung UK Parliament, he will consider dropping the current ban on SNP MPs voting on England-only issues. It seems Nick Clegg isn't the only one relishing the thought of pulling the anti-democratic strings of "a balanced Parliament". Last October Salmond said:

“There’s a vast, overwhelming majority of people in Scotland, regardless of political preference, who rather like the idea of the Westminster parliament being hung by a Scottish rope."

However, the cavalry is racing towards us in their usual, last-minute dash: in an attempt to placate the English, the Conservatives have pledged to introduce a policy of “English votes for English laws” if they form the next UK government in an attempt to answer the West Lothian question. Last night they indicated that they would not countenance any formal arrangement with the SNP which would see Nationalist MPs voting on Enland-only matters.

The only satisfactory conclusion to this mess of devolution is for England to have her own Parliament but, as I've said before, all it will do is cement the break-up of the UK and deliver us, weakened, into the hands of the EU.  Mind you, I did have a thought.  Since it was the UK which signed up to the EU and the UK would no longer exist if Scotland was fully independent, wouldn't that mean that all existing treaties between the UK and the EU would be null and void?   How can you have treaties between two parties, one of whom no longer exists?  And how would the constitutional position of HM the Queen be affected?  Would she still be Head of State and Queen of Scotland?  There are so many constitutional anomalies to make it a political nightmare yet at the same time it seems an incredibly simple solution to the EU problem.  I must be missing something.
Calling England

Food For Thought

Scotland v BBC

Today the SNP will lodge papers with the Court of Session in Edinburgh. The party will challenge the decision of BBC executives to exclude it from the debate and the BBC Trust's rejection of it's appeal. It will demand that Mr Salmond is included in Thursday's debate on the economy or that a fourth debate, involving the First Minister, Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg be held prior to 6 May and broadcast UK-wide.

If the BBC and three main UK parties refuse, the SNP will demand Thursday's debate be scrapped.

The result may not be known until Wednesday or Thursday morning.

The SNP raised over £50,000 in a day and a half to help with the legal costs. A tremendous achievement for what many, south of the border, consider is a 'small' political party.

Support has come from far and wide; party members and non-members; even from those who don't vote SNP - but support the principle that the people of Scotland are not second-class citizens as the BBC would lead us to believe.

Professional Scottish journalists, such as Joan MacAlpine and Alex Massie, are fully behind the SNP's action and surprisingly so is Magnus Linklater in the Times. Magnus supports the union but he understand a devolved Scotland and its politics.

Has the BBC been impartial in its treatment of Scottish voters? Has it recognised the need to represent the whole of the UK rather than just one part of it? Does it, in short, understand Britain?

To all of which, the answer is almost certainly —- no.

The action shows that we will no longer be silenced by insults and put-downs from unionist politicians and organisations. At last we're prepared to put our money where our mouths are and challenge an organisation which receives its fair share of funding from us, but returns so little and often grudgingly.

The result of the court case will tell Scotland where she stands with regard to her position within Britain's public service broadcasting organisation.

The SNP is not funded by all the UK, it is funded by Scotland's people because it only represents them. It cannot attract the vast sums unionist parties do, but money doesn't buy everything. It doesn't buy principle (although it's handy to buy lawyers) and it certainly doesn't buy democracy.

Good luck Scotland.

Scotland v BBC

Scotland's Independence Referendum Bill

Yesterday morning Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister, published the Independence Referendum Bill consultation document which offered opposition parties the chance to frame a question on alternatives to outright secession. The proposals in the draft Bill are now out to a nine week consultation.

The proposal is for a referendum with two questions on two separate ballot papers and mirrors the approach of the 1997 referendum on the Scottish Parliament. You can see a copy of the Bill here.

First voters would be asked to vote 'yes' or 'no' on whether they support the Scottish parliament being given new devolved powers.

The consultation paper offers two alternatives for this question: one based on the so-called 'devolution max' option of giving Holyrood control of everything except defence, foreign affairs and financial regulation and another based on the more limited powers put forward by the Calman Commission.

They will then be asked whether "the parliament's powers should also be extended to enable independence to be achieved".

About a third of Scotland's people want independence but the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey issued in January showed 69% want to see their parliament take on more responsibility.

Scotland's opposition parties been giving their usual anti-soundbites against the Bill. "Unnecessary and unwanted", "a vanity project", "waste of money", "putting narrow nationalism ahead of the interests of Scotland" - all protestations we've heard before.

Whether one supports independence or not, there is one serious aspect of this Bill. It offers the Scottish people the chance to vote for their own futures in a referendum. Opposition parties must remember that when they are refusing to acknowledge this Bill, they are refusing the Scots the chance to decide their own futures.

Yesterday the unionist parties ignored questioning the FM on the subject at FMQs. They can't continue to ignore it for long. There are many throughout the UK who have long desired a referendum on the EU and been promised one by both labour and the tories - yet they have been openly conned. They will be watching this closely and see a government, who promised the people a referendum, fight for the right to achieve their objective. The actions of those against this right will also be closely observed.

Scotland's Independence Referendum Bill

Boycott Scotland

Scotland has come under immence American pressure following the Justice Secretary's descision to release al-Megrahi the convicted Lockerbie bomber.

Huge efforts by some complete loonies (ooops I mean valued blogging community members) over the Atlantic has a seen a huge amount of web sites and blogs spring up asking for Scottish goods, tourism, products and services to be boycotted and rejected in efforts to make us re-think the actions of the Scottish Government.

I urge you all to visit this link here and go to

http://www.boycottscotland.co.uk/

A superb Parody and a hat tip to a follower of mine Alasdair Martin.

Bwahahaha

Boycott Scotland