Whither Scotland?
It rang a bell - but I had to look up the details. On the web, of course.
There, I was reminded that "The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer" is a 1970 film starring Peter Cook as a manipulative schemer among malleable politicians.
So why, I hear you ask, am I blethering about an unjustly neglected movie? Because a senior Labour figure invited me to compare the cinematic Rimmer with the decidedly real and present Alex Salmond.
Rimmer thrives for two reasons - he is plausible; and politicians, of various parties, fail to spot his emperor-style absence of outer clothing.
From neglect or laziness, they fail to see through him to the (lack of) substance.
Our contemporary, real-life politicians, I was told, aren't so daft.
They hear Mr Salmond say that his "national conversation" on Scotland's future contains a wide range of options. But they know, I was assured, that the First Minister is only truly interested in one option - independence.
There's a dose of truth there. Yes, the First Minister wants to tempt rival politicians into a debate in order, partly, to legitimise his favoured option of independence. He is luring them, he is gulling them.
Ultimately, though, independence wouldn't happen by stealth or guile. It would only happen if and when the Scottish people vote for it, openly, both in a Parliamentary election and in a subsequent referendum. Not really Rimmer's style.
So, will the Opposition parties take part in the "national conversation"? Mostly, no. I believe they could no more take part in this, predicated upon independence as the ultimate goal of the originators, than the SNP and the Tories found themselves able to participate in the Constitutional Convention set up by Labour, the Liberal Democrats and others.
It appears, however, that there will be a wider conversation. For one thing, I feel certain that the good and sensible people of Scotland, England and elsewhere will pitch in online and at the various public meetings planned by the Executive.
For another, the three Opposition parties at Holyrood are now committed to having a shufti again at the devolution settlement.
That means various things to the Big(gish) Three. For the Liberal Democrats, it means control of taxation and other new powers. For the Tories, it means strengthen the Union by strengthening devolution.
For Labour, it means…….well, what exactly? The opposition statement was deliberately imprecise - although it's hard to imagine that any review would culminate in lessening the powers of Holyrood. For now, it means that Labour would rather we listened to them rather than A. Salmond. Any detail will have to await the election of a new Scottish Labour leader.
Today's document, though, is substantive. It is plainly a government publication, not party.
It sets out in considerable detail the options for further enhancing Holyrood's powers and specifies with great care the precise routes to be followed, should the popular mandate ensue.
The civil service has worked hard - and thoroughly - for their new political masters.
Whither Scotland? Despite all the words, despite all the arguments, it's really simple. Whither Scotland? You, the voters, will decide.
If you would like to join the executive debate go to https://www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/a-national-conversation
PS: Any chance of another Executive review - into the scandalous state of Scottish football refereeing? That red card for Kalvenes at Rugby Park last night was a disgrace!
I'm 
Comments
There shall be
an independent Scotland. Open the doors
let the people come, let them see
what can be done, when hands
make what hearts will.
We will not undo
what has already been undone
but rebuild and renew;
the past gifts this present.
Three hundred years have turned
and these nations have held firm,
their paths misguided
by the other’s truer course.
London swells with Scots
and Edinburgh is home to all;
like siblings we share our parents
but as adults we must live apart.
Let us not talk of distance,
the land is our common bond,
a marriage bed in later life
with each side firmly held,
and sometimes from sleep
we will embrace, our vows
to renew, to live in amity, free
from the passions of our youth.
We are our voice.
Sing not of dusty papers
nor of fields now untrodden,
our song is ourselves; our way ahead.
Independence is not freedom,
put your shoulders to the yoke.
It’s about how we carry ourselves,
not with a swagger but a stride.
Hi guys,
Just visited several other posts Herald, Mail, Telegraph, Scottish parliament etc. Its amazing, only one third of scots want a referendum, my bahooky!
Id say its about 90 percent on all the blogs whether your for Independance or not the people want their say on this issue.
But will we get it?
Hi Brian,
First half of your piece I was beginning to think the unbiased people in the scottish media were holding your loved ones hostage, but was glad you balanced the piece out before the end. Could you please have a word with the other media types telling us all sorts to be more honest, unbiased and perhaps stick to the real point.
A referendum allows all scots to a choice of a new scottish constitution, people who support the status quo (not the rock band) and nats (not the annoying bity thingys). All the people get to choose.
On this matter of Scotlands future the decision must be made by the Scottish public.
The ´óÏó´«Ã½ news said today:
"It was supposed to have been settled a decade ago. Was Scotland in the UK or out of it? The answer from the referendum was in."
I would laugh it wasn't so dreadful. The vote a decade ago was not one on unthirldom, it was on devolution. Independence wasn't even on the menu.
The ´óÏó´«Ã½ in London couldn't even do some basic research for their "political" correspondent. Brian, get on the phone and tell them what's what!
Scottish adults are being denied their right to self determination by 78 MSPs, 46 Labour including an ex First Minister whose nose is severely out of joint, 16 Conservative who would all but have no seats except for proportional representation which the Conservatives strongly oppose and 16 Liberal Democrats who are living in a fantasy land; from this it would be unwise to deduce, or more correctly assume that I am pro independence, my concerns are with this rag-bag of a coalition that has been formed from individuals that previously could find no common ground to benefit Scotland.
We must deduce that they still have found no common ground merely a common enemy, or they have been converted on the road to the Debating Chamber; there are certain questions that require answered before assessment can be made of the intent of each group of MSPs.
Who led the campaign for consensus, was it the wounded ex First Minister?
Was the main motive of any party or individual one of revenge?
Should and ex First Minister, who has all but resigned from the Labour Party leadership permitted to continue to possibly run with his own agenda; was this the reason he has delayed his departure?
Was there other common ground proposed/discussed?
Is there an ulterior motive in play; are they going to attempt to bring down the legally elected Government of Scotland?
Opinion Poll: 65% Want Troops out of Iraq.
Labour Response: This British Government is not run by Opinion Polls and the only poll that matters is the General Election.
Opinion Poll: 48% Reject Independence
Labour Response: There is no point in holding a referendum because opinion polls suggest that the majority of people will reject Independence.
Whither Democracy ?
Just checked on 'ground shifting' line and it is fair going strong!
Happened to catch the White Paper Launch on News 24 and had a smile at the London based commentators faces at the end. They just did not know where to go and such a grudging 'we will go to our Scottish correspondent later'!
As for the Unionist Trio. I am not sure whether they are spoilt children having a tantrum and saying 'no' to everything, but this lacks the passion of that, or practising lines because that is the line they must pursue, because they've no other thought!
No matter what their opinion is about the matter, surely they owe it to their adherents and to the Scottish people to justify and explain the stance they have taken? In other words argue their case, that this is the best way for Scotland's future. This seems to smack of 'we're nae playing because we've nae ideas' or 'it wisna oor idea so we're aff!'
Come on! Everyone is entitled to know why they have taken this stance as at the end of the day the Scottish people will decide somehow, or have they conveniently forgotten that?
Sitting next to you this morning Brian I could feel your pain with the unjust and erroneous decision at Rugby Park. Whilst the red card will no doubt be rescinded the 3 points will not.
My hope is that the 3 unionist parties do not rush to make such a rash, ill judged and unjust decision to not even enter this conversation - for it is simply just a conversation.
Do they have something to hide or fear? Do they simply not have any response other than 'we would like more powers'? What, where and when? Or do they simply say such quips in order to sound in touch with the electorates desire to see a stronger, wiser and more accountable Scotland?
Personally I cannot see the 'biggish 3' providing any real input other than lets not get ahead of ourselves, in the hope that it will simply go away. For it will not and the day will come.
So if they truly believe that their is a 'union dividend' then can they at the very least tell the country how they hope to enhance this. Or is the dividend decidedly one way - southbound - and they see any debate on greater autonomy simply highlighting the inequalities that exist, their inability to be amended or just 'sewelled' and thus serve to heighten still further the need for equality for all: Independence.
P.S. I think the decision to red card Kalvenes was just karma for Levein's comments pre-election time.
Scots should aspire to join the first division of economic and lifestyle high achieving neighbouring small counties of Northern Europe, and NOT continue as an economic and lifestyle low-achieving provincial backwater of the UK. Scots are fed up being portrayed as a land full of feckless wastrels, subsidised to the hilt by a benevolent English public. Scotland is one of the nations that make up the UK and her people deserve the chance to decide if they want to manage their own affairs and resources.
You're absolutely right about that red card you know.....
No wonder politics stink.
The SNP pledges something in their Election Manifesto. The Election is held. The SNP are the largest Party. The SNP form an Administration. The SNP Administration act to fullfil the pledges made in their manifesto. The Opposition parties then shout that the SNP should go back on their pledge! Is it any wonder they get a bad reputation?
Do I want Independance? No. Did I vote SNP? No. Should the SNP propose holding a referendum so that my "NO" vote counts? Yes. Why? .. because thats what they said they would do.
Will one referendum be enough?
I may be wrong but I think the Party Quebecois ran a series of referenda on separation from Canada when they were in power. However, Canada is still one nation.
If the Nationalists were defeated in a referendum, I doubt whether they would let it rest there. Sadly, I think the answer is no.
I have never been out-and-out pro independence. My thinking is that independence will merely remove the excuse of blaming 'London' for everything perceived as wrong or unfair. Thereafter we will be seeking desperately for better leaders while facing the grim realities of self-financing and the prospect that the negotiated settlement hadn't rid us of nuclear weaponry for some vastly long period!
But I was turned from an instinctive LibDem voter to a reluctant SNP one by Nicol Stephen's earlier refusal to countenance the right of the Scots to decide for themselves in a referendum. NS and other non-indepence leaders should not be allowed to set themselves up as arbiters on the application of democracy.
I commend a thorough read of the full document, and then we can perhaps have an informed discussion.
I do agree with the majority of posters here that Alex has all the right moves, and I also have been in favour of independence for more than three decades.
It is an excellent paper, by the way, and you're right, Brian, to note that it isn't a 'party' paper, but a government one. I've also noticed a favourable change in Eck's voice and delivery of late. I always liked his humour and irreverence, but a certain gravitas seems to have developed without loss to the other qualities.
Welcome to the New Age of Scotland!
Slainte
ed
Please someone should clarify...is it separation Scotland wants or independence? I think people are misusing the word independence.
I see news 24 could not bring themselves to show Alex Salmond discussing his white paper on independence, instead they had a labour spin doctor telling everyone that the Scots dont want independence and if they got a vote Alex Salmond would land on his butt.This typifies the beeb and their short sightedness of affairs Scottish.I feel that the beeb are playing into the SNP hands by this disgraceful behaviour.I know very few Scots who dont want independence and total control for the SNP. Since the last election there has been a groundshift of support from the toe the political party line labour party to the fast thinking SNP. Long may it continue.
wrhouston:
Quebec has seen two referenda, fifteen years apart. One in 1980 and one in 1995. Hardly a series. Alex Salmond has stated that an independence referendum comes once in a generation. His opinion is that Scotland shouldn't see one for another twenty years past the last.
Interesting that Nicol Stephen began by calling a referendum of the Scottish people "Independence by the back door" and then a "neverendum like in Quebec". He's worse than South of the Border political correspondants...
Why do we hear labour and the rest scare mongering about independance? Where do they get these opinion polls from? i dont know anyone that wouldnt love independance so where are all the GB lovers?
Go for it Scotland thats what i say..
From what i read online most of the English want us to be independant anyway, sad and deluded that it will somehow improve thier lot and lower thier taxes (dream on) as for the welsh they also seem to welcome independance so lets stop this charade and make the break. Politicians wouldnt know public opinion if it hit them and dragged them 20 miles down the road they are just interested in their own agendas.
What do you think will hapen to the three opposition parties over the next three years, in particular the Tories?
Isn't there every likelihood that the Scottish Tories will split (informally, at least) into a camp that advocates the Union first and foremost (similar to the position before the devolution referendum) and a camp that advocates, if only of necessity, a right wing analysis of Scottish issues regardless of the constitutional context, including right-wing proposals (on tax, business development, social issues) for a post-independence Scotland?
Bryce (17), You tell 'em, boy!
David (19), Interesting thoughts, aqnd I have long expected that, once independence is achieved, the SNP will likely fragment. We will have a truly rainbow parliament, and I look forward to that with pleasure.
Slainte
ed