An Independent Scotland might well not be a weak nation, will not be a poor state but will not gain top table status, especially if run by a centralizing, overspending and smug government.
The United Kingdom, broken up by the independence of Scotland, will doubtless be diminished, certainly in the short and medium term. And that will have an adverse impact on world security and stability.
Any perception that the UK's break up weakens it, will weaken her impact and influence in NATO, multiplying the effect current force reductions. The reality of Scottish Independence with the subsequent uncertainty over Trident basing will create a shock wave amongst the allies, and some mirth to say the least in Putin's front office.
The UK's voice in the UN Security Council may be deemed to be toned down - and perhaps her veto questioned.
Scotland is not a colony growing up to make its own way in the world. Scotland is a partner in a Union that has been a world leader and possible the most successful force for good, security and stability, despite an imperfect past. Churchill might have said that the Union might not always have been perfect, but it has made a most impressive contribution.
I hope Scots will not follow the narrow inward looking selfishness so smugly exuded by Salmond and his people.
Showing posts with label Scotland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scotland. Show all posts
Saturday, 13 September 2014
Friday, 31 May 2013
Does the Media make or report the news?
PRESS RELEASE IMMEDIATE
UKIP's Chairman in Scotland, Mike Scott-Hayward, has welcomed an Evening Express poll in Aberdeen which shows UKIP ahead of the Liberal Democrats, and just a neck behind the Labour and the Conservatives.
"The poll shows the SNP 35.7%, Conservative 11.9%, Labour 11.9%, Labour 10.3%, UKIP 8.7% and Liberal Democrats 4.8%.
"In contrast to this clear balance seen by the voters, BBC Radio Scotland held a radio hustings excluding UKIP from the panel. The usual Beeb judgement is that only the last election counts, not the present situation or the future. The panel on Brian Taylor's Big Debate was a four party melee - a very noisy incident often reduced to a level of shouting that equalled the unreasoning level of noise I heard on the streets of Edinburgh a fortnight ago.
"I acknowledge that Brian did play sound clips from other candidates, including Otto Inglis of UKIP, but the balance of babble might have been brought round to a better debate had the parties now showing above, say, 5% in the popular polls, all been participants.
"The rules followed by the BBC do entrench the establishment - luckily, voters are not bound by the same fixed mentality and I forsee UKIP beating at least one, or perhaps even two, so called major political parties here in Scotland, as we are already doing elsewhere in the UK".
Mike Scott-Hayward
Chairman UKIPScotland
07917365197/01334655040
UKIP's Chairman in Scotland, Mike Scott-Hayward, has welcomed an Evening Express poll in Aberdeen which shows UKIP ahead of the Liberal Democrats, and just a neck behind the Labour and the Conservatives.
"The poll shows the SNP 35.7%, Conservative 11.9%, Labour 11.9%, Labour 10.3%, UKIP 8.7% and Liberal Democrats 4.8%.
"In contrast to this clear balance seen by the voters, BBC Radio Scotland held a radio hustings excluding UKIP from the panel. The usual Beeb judgement is that only the last election counts, not the present situation or the future. The panel on Brian Taylor's Big Debate was a four party melee - a very noisy incident often reduced to a level of shouting that equalled the unreasoning level of noise I heard on the streets of Edinburgh a fortnight ago.
"I acknowledge that Brian did play sound clips from other candidates, including Otto Inglis of UKIP, but the balance of babble might have been brought round to a better debate had the parties now showing above, say, 5% in the popular polls, all been participants.
"The rules followed by the BBC do entrench the establishment - luckily, voters are not bound by the same fixed mentality and I forsee UKIP beating at least one, or perhaps even two, so called major political parties here in Scotland, as we are already doing elsewhere in the UK".
Mike Scott-Hayward
Chairman UKIPScotland
07917365197/01334655040
Friday, 26 April 2013
SNP – NOT JUST THE TORIES – ARE ATTRACTED BY UKIP
SNP – NOT JUST THE TORIES – ARE ATTRACTED BY UKIP
Across the United Kingdom, the UK Independence Party (UKIP) is attracting increased support, from the previously disengaged and from those now disenchanted with the existing politic elite. According the UKIP, the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats have seen supporters switch to them as, indeed, have some councillors.
This trend is also evident in Scotland where, according to the Chairman of UKIPScotland, Mike Scott-Hayward, even the SNP are now vulnerable to UKIP at grass roots level.
“We were delighted to hear a speech from a prominent former member of the SNP, Michael McCafferty, at our Spring Gathering in Edinburgh,” Mike Scott-Hayward explained.
“We paraded a range of speakers who had previously been members of other parties, and of none, putting to rest the myth that we are comprised simply of former Tories.
"Sure we have ex Tories, including me, but that is just part of the picture.Michael McCafferty, who had been involved with the SNP since from the late eighties and rose to being a member of the YSN National Executive, is now well ensconced with UKIP."
Mr McCafferty told the UKIP Gathering that he had come came to feel that the SNP had turned into just another party of ‘yes’ men and its obsession with the EU seemed misplaced.
He said, “Norway was always trumpeted by Alex Salmond as a role model for Scotland, and yet it wasn’t controlled by Brussels. Indeed the two most prosperous countries in Europe – Switzerland and Norway were fully independent which led me to question the SNP policy of further European integration.
“It was only by spending time in Ireland that I saw the true face of the EU. Ireland had bravely voted ‘no’ to the Lisbon Treaty, but a dodgy rerun got Brussels the ‘yes’ result it wanted. With the EU and IMF firmly in charge now, the country is but a shadow of itself, and is simply a pawn in a bigger game, in which Brussels owns the board and the pieces.
“The situation in Ireland, and in some of the other European countries, encouraged me to look again at the EU. The hand of Brussels was behind all of the major issues affecting the continent, and the UK was similarly being drawn into this economic and social mess.
“But one man was speaking up against this European madness….and it wasn’t Alex Salmond. Indeed it was only when I heard Nigel Farage last year, telling Merkel and Obama to butt out of Britain’s business that I finally decided that it was time to get back into the political game, by joining UKIP.”
Sunday, 21 April 2013
Cohesion against the madness of wind as a significant energy source
There are a plethora of anti- wind energy groups.
Some wonder why they are not better co-ordinated and why a new political party has, despite being little more than a group of single issue lobbyists, has registered?
Don't be confused - the ant-wind lobbies are all united together against wind energy; they have a strong message and Scotland Against Spin does quite well in reaching out to them all.
As they all, however, lack political clout, some have formed a party. That doesn't solve the wider issue, because the new party's policies are inept.
The reason for the lack of proper clout lies in the persistence of political loyalties amongst the lobbyists. This makes it difficult for the various groups to present a single clear political message.
So, for most part, they proclaim the need to be "non aligned" in order to keep folk on board.
No one who is truly active on any political issue, however, can be wholly devoid of a party political view or avoid a party preference; for the thinking majority, innate and natural party loyalties are hard to drop.
It is impossible to divide one's soul between a blind loyalty and a conflicting political objective. So there in the unspoken coalition of supporters of all parties (all but UKIP supporters) in which each member silently bears the dilemma that the party for whom loyalty is felt, does in practise support, promote and implement the abhorrent wind energy polices.
The question is, can "non-alignment" defeat the dynamics of that dilemma? Need it? Will the dilemma lead to much, or continual, repositioning?
When the opportunity to have an impact greater than simple objection and protest arrives, that is, when standing at the ballot box, each individual will have to face down their own demons.
Will they vote then for undying loyalties that promote wind and accept the drive from the EU, or will they think afresh and vote for UKIP, against both the stupidity of wind as a significant energy source, and against the continued subjugation of the UK to EU rules?
We will have to wait to see what they do on the day. In the meantime Salmond sails on, the Coalition continues dodging, and the EU seems unassailable. A huge rise in UKIP members and poll support for our clear message could, however, shock the incumbents into policy change.
Some wonder why they are not better co-ordinated and why a new political party has, despite being little more than a group of single issue lobbyists, has registered?
Don't be confused - the ant-wind lobbies are all united together against wind energy; they have a strong message and Scotland Against Spin does quite well in reaching out to them all.
As they all, however, lack political clout, some have formed a party. That doesn't solve the wider issue, because the new party's policies are inept.
The reason for the lack of proper clout lies in the persistence of political loyalties amongst the lobbyists. This makes it difficult for the various groups to present a single clear political message.
So, for most part, they proclaim the need to be "non aligned" in order to keep folk on board.
No one who is truly active on any political issue, however, can be wholly devoid of a party political view or avoid a party preference; for the thinking majority, innate and natural party loyalties are hard to drop.
It is impossible to divide one's soul between a blind loyalty and a conflicting political objective. So there in the unspoken coalition of supporters of all parties (all but UKIP supporters) in which each member silently bears the dilemma that the party for whom loyalty is felt, does in practise support, promote and implement the abhorrent wind energy polices.
The question is, can "non-alignment" defeat the dynamics of that dilemma? Need it? Will the dilemma lead to much, or continual, repositioning?
When the opportunity to have an impact greater than simple objection and protest arrives, that is, when standing at the ballot box, each individual will have to face down their own demons.
Will they vote then for undying loyalties that promote wind and accept the drive from the EU, or will they think afresh and vote for UKIP, against both the stupidity of wind as a significant energy source, and against the continued subjugation of the UK to EU rules?
We will have to wait to see what they do on the day. In the meantime Salmond sails on, the Coalition continues dodging, and the EU seems unassailable. A huge rise in UKIP members and poll support for our clear message could, however, shock the incumbents into policy change.
Thursday, 24 January 2013
Cameron is buying time
Cameron is buying time to get the Tories beyond the next General Election, on grounds that UKIP has shown him are those the public wish to address. His confusion, as Salmond rightly says, is that at heart he still agrees with Nick and wants to stay in the EU.
He must also know that negotiating will lead nowhere - he can never hope to get a final settlement; that is not the way the EU works. But his gloss will work for many top Tories who want also need to sneak past the next ballot box. Even Boris is putting on a show of support - that is my big disappointment today - and so we can all expect a review of policy by the Tories if they ever get back in and get to sit at the negotiating table with the EU bureaucracy. They will say they tried thier best!
As Salmond says, they are doing the two horse thing. But so is he! Salmond talks about Scottish Independence as if he means that the Scots will govern Scotland. His other horse is the "in Europe" bit - the confusion he is palming off on the Scots is to pretend that there is such a thing as "independence in Europe". There is not. How can any nation state, the UK or, if Salmond gets a positive vote, even Scotland, call itself sovereign when a foreign collective makes 80% of its laws?
Scotland needs to be out of the EU as much as does the UK as a whole - and the best way to achieve that is to remain United and to have an in/out EU vote. The chattering political class is truly confused - Cameron's EU option is an attempt at selling a dummy, and from Salmond a wee pretendy independence option for Scotland alone.
Clearly, the hopping about by Cameron, Milliband's closing the door on EU debate, Nick not letting anyone have an EU referendum now, and Salmond's play on the use of the word "independence" means more people will turn to UKIP in Scotland; our numbers have come up by 25% in the last three months because, I believe, UKIP offers what the British want - a sovereign United Kingdom freed from the EU political machine.
He must also know that negotiating will lead nowhere - he can never hope to get a final settlement; that is not the way the EU works. But his gloss will work for many top Tories who want also need to sneak past the next ballot box. Even Boris is putting on a show of support - that is my big disappointment today - and so we can all expect a review of policy by the Tories if they ever get back in and get to sit at the negotiating table with the EU bureaucracy. They will say they tried thier best!
As Salmond says, they are doing the two horse thing. But so is he! Salmond talks about Scottish Independence as if he means that the Scots will govern Scotland. His other horse is the "in Europe" bit - the confusion he is palming off on the Scots is to pretend that there is such a thing as "independence in Europe". There is not. How can any nation state, the UK or, if Salmond gets a positive vote, even Scotland, call itself sovereign when a foreign collective makes 80% of its laws?
Scotland needs to be out of the EU as much as does the UK as a whole - and the best way to achieve that is to remain United and to have an in/out EU vote. The chattering political class is truly confused - Cameron's EU option is an attempt at selling a dummy, and from Salmond a wee pretendy independence option for Scotland alone.
Clearly, the hopping about by Cameron, Milliband's closing the door on EU debate, Nick not letting anyone have an EU referendum now, and Salmond's play on the use of the word "independence" means more people will turn to UKIP in Scotland; our numbers have come up by 25% in the last three months because, I believe, UKIP offers what the British want - a sovereign United Kingdom freed from the EU political machine.
Thursday, 20 December 2012
UKIP is turning the screw on the complacent governing elite.
A little anecdote for you all on lobbying methodology whilst
the topic is in the air.
Well, a few weeks ago I published a Press Release to the effect that UKIP will monitor cases for fraud etc. The Press ignored this but I published it on FB and Blogger, but I have since had several direct approaches by people suffering the blight of turbines, and at a loss as to what to do. They have all asked their elected representatives for help, and to little avail. So they called me, having found me via FB, my blog etc.
Demonstrations work, and I advocate regularity, e.g. a
frequent demo at the Council and outside the MP and MSP surgeries, whenever
they have them. As well as the bigger events.
But my anecdote relates to subtle political pressure: the
ruling class is now very aware of the surge in membership and rise in
popularity of UKIP, and are on watch to see that they are not outflanked by us.
Is that so, you say? How does Mike know this?
Well, a few weeks ago I published a Press Release to the effect that UKIP will monitor cases for fraud etc. The Press ignored this but I published it on FB and Blogger, but I have since had several direct approaches by people suffering the blight of turbines, and at a loss as to what to do. They have all asked their elected representatives for help, and to little avail. So they called me, having found me via FB, my blog etc.
I am no expert, but have political experience and am now in
the process of advising them - still to get round them all, some far afield,
but I will do it.
Now, here's the rub: I advised one caller, amongst other
things, to write to a party leader specifically outlining the mix of horrors
suffered and the lack of help received from the elected. I also advised that the point should be made
that UKIP had been approached - i.e. I was cc'd into the email to the said
party leader. The point was to rattle a cage. Politics, you see. I also
arranged to call to discuss the case.
Last week, I was able to visit as promised and on arrival
was surprised to see another caller already there, discussing the case. The
woman visitor concerned seemed a bit embarrassed when we were introduced, and
she left without further ado.
So what?
Well, it transpired that the visitor was an elected local
councillor, and had revealed that she was calling on behalf of the said party
leader and on behalf of the party's local MSP as well. There is no doubt in my mind that the sudden
and immediate attention, where previously there had been lethargy, was clearly
a direct result of UKIP involvement and a party attempt to defend their
indefensible policies and to cover their flank.
Sunday, 11 November 2012
Calling Alex Salmond.........
Angela Merkel reportedly told the European Parliament, just before heading of to chat to Coalition Dave in Downing Street, “Of course the European Commission will one day become a government, the European Council a second chamber and the European Parliament will have more powers – but for now we have to focus on the euro and give people a little more time to come along."
Now, the First Minister and his separatist bedfellows should ponder hard on what their Independence in Europe really means. Alex Salmond need not ask any lawyers - just ask Angela.
The solution, of course, is independence - for the UK out of the EU.
Now, the First Minister and his separatist bedfellows should ponder hard on what their Independence in Europe really means. Alex Salmond need not ask any lawyers - just ask Angela.
The solution, of course, is independence - for the UK out of the EU.
Saturday, 29 September 2012
How effective is UKIP?
Could there be a UKIP led political revolution?
It is entirely possible.
Certainly, UKIP inspired change is on the way.
The EU's control over us is the bigger part leading to this change - but the wind energy debate is well to the fore.
The latest YouGov polls show UKIP are now the third most popular party in the UK and in Scotland the poll shows a spectacular change
Scottish Results
Conservative 17% (-2%)
Labour 40% (-1%)
LibDem 4% no change
UKIP 8% (+4%)
SNP 28% (-5%)
Green 1% (-1%)
BNP 2% (+1%)
UKIPScotland is now level pegging with the LibDems in Scotland. The coalition Government will be wide awake to these changes - and worried. The way to stop the Coalition from ignoring popular will is to support UKIP, joining us, voting for us, working with us.
It is entirely possible.
Certainly, UKIP inspired change is on the way.
The EU's control over us is the bigger part leading to this change - but the wind energy debate is well to the fore.
The latest YouGov polls show UKIP are now the third most popular party in the UK and in Scotland the poll shows a spectacular change
Scottish Results
Conservative 17% (-2%)
Labour 40% (-1%)
LibDem 4% no change
UKIP 8% (+4%)
SNP 28% (-5%)
Green 1% (-1%)
BNP 2% (+1%)
UKIPScotland is now level pegging with the LibDems in Scotland. The coalition Government will be wide awake to these changes - and worried. The way to stop the Coalition from ignoring popular will is to support UKIP, joining us, voting for us, working with us.
Sunday, 26 August 2012
Make MSPs take the decison! Or give us binding referenda.
The most destructive planning phenomena we now face in Scotland is the resort to appeals when an elected council rejects a wind farm application.
Some Reporters may uphold the refusals decided democratically but that is not always the case. Communities face division and destruction of amenity as a result.
MSPs who have signed up the Scottish Parliament's pro wind policies and diktats, and whose parties all back subsidies and DECC line to the hilt, sit smugly away from the realities. I have yet to see or hear of my local MSP, for example, going to a community council meeting discussing wind issues, to see the effect of these policies on the community's constituents.
Whilst UKIP policy is that planning appeals would not be taken "out of county" by unelected officers but be decided by binding local referenda amongst the concerned communities/planning area, such trust of the electorate is an anathema to the other parties. It won't happen until UKIP has sufficient elected power in Westminster and Holyrood - on a par with our now being the second largest British party in the European Parliament.
Meantime, why do we have MSPs? Is it their role to sit smugly and aloof in Holyrood, and not carry the buck for what the laws they passed?
I say make them all, sitting in committee of the whole house, decide all wind farm appeals, with their votes recorded, so that we may know them for what they earn.
Mike Scott-Hayward
Chairman UKIP Scotland
Some Reporters may uphold the refusals decided democratically but that is not always the case. Communities face division and destruction of amenity as a result.
MSPs who have signed up the Scottish Parliament's pro wind policies and diktats, and whose parties all back subsidies and DECC line to the hilt, sit smugly away from the realities. I have yet to see or hear of my local MSP, for example, going to a community council meeting discussing wind issues, to see the effect of these policies on the community's constituents.
Whilst UKIP policy is that planning appeals would not be taken "out of county" by unelected officers but be decided by binding local referenda amongst the concerned communities/planning area, such trust of the electorate is an anathema to the other parties. It won't happen until UKIP has sufficient elected power in Westminster and Holyrood - on a par with our now being the second largest British party in the European Parliament.
Meantime, why do we have MSPs? Is it their role to sit smugly and aloof in Holyrood, and not carry the buck for what the laws they passed?
I say make them all, sitting in committee of the whole house, decide all wind farm appeals, with their votes recorded, so that we may know them for what they earn.
Mike Scott-Hayward
Chairman UKIP Scotland
Thursday, 23 August 2012
Dumb Wind Politics
The views just expressed by Cllr Alex Rowley, Leader of Fife Council, that Fife is not to be closed to wind farms, shows the value to his party of the deft use of a call for a moratorium. It was never a policy to stop wind farms. But it gained him power, with the support of the Conservatives.
Only UKIP stands four square against wind turbines and the easiest political weapon to stop vast numbers of applications coming forward is to abolish the subsidies. That lies in the hands of the weak Coalition Government - weak because their few sensible Conservative MPs haven't the courage to kick the Lib Dems out, or to join UKIP en masse, and weak because the Coalition won't cross the EU diktat which sets the targets to be followed.
Within the restraints of current Government policy, UKIP Scotland fully endorses the the calls made by CATS: each point they make would be a huge bonus for Scotland - certainly a mandatory 2000 metre buffer zone between turbines and homes should be implemented now. Even if applied only to turbines over, say, 20 metres high, the current adverse impact would be reduced to a reasonable level. UKIP however, still contends that there should be no subsidy at all - there'd be precious few turbines even under 20 metres then - they are not self sustaining in any real sense. Farmers and ladowners now grab at turbines because, with the subsidy, they are the best available legal yield per acre!
It's a case of never mind the landscape or the economic realities - increase utility costs for all, bribe communities and subsidize useless machines for the sake of a daft political aim.
Beats me - even the dumbest politician must realise that there won't be many places left for a decent photo opportunity in an 'unspoilt' Scotland soon.
Tuesday, 31 July 2012
Affodable Homes - Right to Buy not a barrier
Shelter Scotland are urging the Scottish Executive to abolish the right to buy.
The reasons are ostensibly understandable - there is a shortage of affordable homes to rent. Their thinking, however, is flawed: retaining a sitting tenant (by preventing them from buying) does not create a new home or shorten the waiting list.
Allowing a council house to be bought, does not make it disappear from overall stock. The occupants who, up to the time of purchasing, are council tenants, become home owner occupiers; owners indeed, of a house bought affordably. The Right to Buy is truly an affordable home purchase scheme. Well done Mrs Thatcher.
Some reforms are necessary. For example, all revenues raised should have to be used to support further access to affordable homes. The best way, I believe, would be to turn the revenue into grants to those on the waiting lists, towards deposits for new homes - in other words, used to subsidise purchase, making purchase more affordable. A variety of ways could be devised.
Let's stop knocking a policy that has achieved a high home ownership ratio - an advance from the time when Scotland had fewer home owners proportionately than then communist East Germany.
The reasons are ostensibly understandable - there is a shortage of affordable homes to rent. Their thinking, however, is flawed: retaining a sitting tenant (by preventing them from buying) does not create a new home or shorten the waiting list.
Allowing a council house to be bought, does not make it disappear from overall stock. The occupants who, up to the time of purchasing, are council tenants, become home owner occupiers; owners indeed, of a house bought affordably. The Right to Buy is truly an affordable home purchase scheme. Well done Mrs Thatcher.
Some reforms are necessary. For example, all revenues raised should have to be used to support further access to affordable homes. The best way, I believe, would be to turn the revenue into grants to those on the waiting lists, towards deposits for new homes - in other words, used to subsidise purchase, making purchase more affordable. A variety of ways could be devised.
Let's stop knocking a policy that has achieved a high home ownership ratio - an advance from the time when Scotland had fewer home owners proportionately than then communist East Germany.
Wednesday, 25 July 2012
British Trade
In or out of the EU, Britain would still trade with the other EU countries. The UK is the biggest customer of many of these countries. So they would still trade with us.
Moreover, data produced last week shows that we are now increasing our trade with the rest of the expanding world.
We should foster our Commonwealth ties and trade.
We should leave the EU - switch back from political subservience to free trade.
Moreover, data produced last week shows that we are now increasing our trade with the rest of the expanding world.
We should foster our Commonwealth ties and trade.
We should leave the EU - switch back from political subservience to free trade.
Wednesday, 8 February 2012
It started with Blair
We are approaching a period of potentially huge change for the United Kingdom – its possible destruction. Not good news on which to begin 2012. The build up to a referendum which will decide the fate of the United Kingdom has now begun in earnest and the battleground is here, in Scotland. UKIP Scotland is unlikely to be a major player; the media will focus on the establishment and parties with elected parliamentarians – but we can and must be more than observers.
The battle over separatism will be waged over as much as two years and set against the background of the potential, probably pending, collapse of the Euro Zone. Both battles are vital to us and UKIP big guns must deploy here often. The major parties will do so in strength, and we should welcome a strong Unionist fight. Facts and figures and numerous scenarios will be postulated; whilst I believe that ultimately most people will vote based on their emotive roots rather than on sophistry, we must battle to win over the undecided.
The SNP have the upper hand now, the initiative is theirs. It is vital that we all resist any temptation unwittingly to aide and abet separation; the mistake of creating a wholly separate devolved parliament in Scotland, distinct from Britain’s Parliament, must not be replicated elsewhere in Great Britain. Our UKIP policy of abolishing MSPs and replacing them within the Scotland Act with MPs proper is, I believe, right. Indeed, I think an England Act should create devolved parliament on those same lines – existing English MPs sitting for England, with all MPs still together in the House of Commons. We have messed enough with our constitution, an horrendous mistake started by Blair and leading by Coalition complicity towards the unravelling of all thet we have ever been.
The battle over separatism will be waged over as much as two years and set against the background of the potential, probably pending, collapse of the Euro Zone. Both battles are vital to us and UKIP big guns must deploy here often. The major parties will do so in strength, and we should welcome a strong Unionist fight. Facts and figures and numerous scenarios will be postulated; whilst I believe that ultimately most people will vote based on their emotive roots rather than on sophistry, we must battle to win over the undecided.
The SNP have the upper hand now, the initiative is theirs. It is vital that we all resist any temptation unwittingly to aide and abet separation; the mistake of creating a wholly separate devolved parliament in Scotland, distinct from Britain’s Parliament, must not be replicated elsewhere in Great Britain. Our UKIP policy of abolishing MSPs and replacing them within the Scotland Act with MPs proper is, I believe, right. Indeed, I think an England Act should create devolved parliament on those same lines – existing English MPs sitting for England, with all MPs still together in the House of Commons. We have messed enough with our constitution, an horrendous mistake started by Blair and leading by Coalition complicity towards the unravelling of all thet we have ever been.
Monday, 23 January 2012
English Parliament et al
It is my view that the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh Assembly, should be made up of those Members of Parliament sitting respectively for Scotland and Wales.
English MPs sitting as such would conducted English business but it may well be that there is a need for an England Act, to formalise English MPs sitting as such, with power to elect a First Minister and to create an English Executive. That English Parliament then would have powers similar to Scotland.
There would, of course, be a need for Acts of Parliament to remove MSPs and Assembly Members, to be replaced by MPs, and possibly also to amend and enhance the Welsh Assembly's powers and status to that of a Welsh Parliament, fully equivalent to the Scottish and English Parliaments.
MPs would continue to serve as they do now at Westminster, working together for the UK, and with their feet on the ground within the devolved Parliaments.
English MPs sitting as such would conducted English business but it may well be that there is a need for an England Act, to formalise English MPs sitting as such, with power to elect a First Minister and to create an English Executive. That English Parliament then would have powers similar to Scotland.
There would, of course, be a need for Acts of Parliament to remove MSPs and Assembly Members, to be replaced by MPs, and possibly also to amend and enhance the Welsh Assembly's powers and status to that of a Welsh Parliament, fully equivalent to the Scottish and English Parliaments.
MPs would continue to serve as they do now at Westminster, working together for the UK, and with their feet on the ground within the devolved Parliaments.
Battle for British Unity
It is time that people realise that the Battle for British unity will be fought in Scotland.
The future of the United Kingdom will be decided right here, in Scotland. This is the political battleground. The attack on the UK began when a Labour Government and Donald Dewar created the Scottish Parliament. That was the equivalent of offering the SNP a beachhead and Alex Salmond has long since secured it.
The SNP have carried out political guerrilla raids, creating as many divides as possible, giving away freebies here to cause disgruntlement in England. The Scottish Parliament has been the battlefield tank forcing divides over student fees, prescription charges, and so called free home care. Even Tories in Holyrood have succumbed to the momentum, believing somehow that more autonomous power will mend the widening gap.
The shockwaves are now rippling to the surface, discombobulating the English, many of whom are now reacting exactly as Salmond wishes. We now see the predictable reaction which Salmond wanted as formerly sober minds in England call for an English Parliament.
They would rue it - we all will.
Already, in Scotland, MPs and the proper Parliament are being alienated from the electorate.
Very few people ever go to see an MP about a reserved powers issue - people need to see their highest elected representatives about more domestic concerns: housing, hospitals, pharmacies or schools threatened with closure, vandalism, crime rates and police numbers, yes, even dog dirt. In Scotland, this means that MSPs have the better interface with the electorate while our Scottish MPs become aloof, are channelled towards weighty national and international issues.
These are vital issues but the interaction of Westminster MPs and British subjects in Scotland, and Wales, is waning; the domestic issues that keep MPs in touch, which keep their feet on the ground, are no longer there in Scotland.
The same happening in England as well, will make the UK government increasingly remote from the people. The "assemblies" will become the focus and the Union will erode; that is why I say we must not replicate the error of the devolved bodies as constituted.
UKIP has a firm and sensible policy on this: the electorate should elect one MP for their constituency and that MP should be in Westminster most of the time and in the devolved more local parliament for the remainder.
The devolved body, the Scottish Parliament here, would continue as it is, but devoid of MSPs. In England, when Welsh and Scottish MPs are at work in their devolved home, English MPs would deal with England’s devolved issues. That means both UK national and domestic roles remained linked, through MPs who will keep a direct interface with the electorate and, exactly what is needed, excessive government is cut with fewer politicians overall with time on their hands to think of ways to rule us.
UK party leaders must not be tempted to balance the books by adding more overloaded assemblies to the mix - trim out instead - and engage the UK's number 1 enemy, Salmond, here, in the beachhead which he has established in Scotland
The future of the United Kingdom will be decided right here, in Scotland. This is the political battleground. The attack on the UK began when a Labour Government and Donald Dewar created the Scottish Parliament. That was the equivalent of offering the SNP a beachhead and Alex Salmond has long since secured it.
The SNP have carried out political guerrilla raids, creating as many divides as possible, giving away freebies here to cause disgruntlement in England. The Scottish Parliament has been the battlefield tank forcing divides over student fees, prescription charges, and so called free home care. Even Tories in Holyrood have succumbed to the momentum, believing somehow that more autonomous power will mend the widening gap.
The shockwaves are now rippling to the surface, discombobulating the English, many of whom are now reacting exactly as Salmond wishes. We now see the predictable reaction which Salmond wanted as formerly sober minds in England call for an English Parliament.
They would rue it - we all will.
Already, in Scotland, MPs and the proper Parliament are being alienated from the electorate.
Very few people ever go to see an MP about a reserved powers issue - people need to see their highest elected representatives about more domestic concerns: housing, hospitals, pharmacies or schools threatened with closure, vandalism, crime rates and police numbers, yes, even dog dirt. In Scotland, this means that MSPs have the better interface with the electorate while our Scottish MPs become aloof, are channelled towards weighty national and international issues.
These are vital issues but the interaction of Westminster MPs and British subjects in Scotland, and Wales, is waning; the domestic issues that keep MPs in touch, which keep their feet on the ground, are no longer there in Scotland.
The same happening in England as well, will make the UK government increasingly remote from the people. The "assemblies" will become the focus and the Union will erode; that is why I say we must not replicate the error of the devolved bodies as constituted.
UKIP has a firm and sensible policy on this: the electorate should elect one MP for their constituency and that MP should be in Westminster most of the time and in the devolved more local parliament for the remainder.
The devolved body, the Scottish Parliament here, would continue as it is, but devoid of MSPs. In England, when Welsh and Scottish MPs are at work in their devolved home, English MPs would deal with England’s devolved issues. That means both UK national and domestic roles remained linked, through MPs who will keep a direct interface with the electorate and, exactly what is needed, excessive government is cut with fewer politicians overall with time on their hands to think of ways to rule us.
UK party leaders must not be tempted to balance the books by adding more overloaded assemblies to the mix - trim out instead - and engage the UK's number 1 enemy, Salmond, here, in the beachhead which he has established in Scotland
Friday, 20 January 2012
Vote UK Out of EU
I welcome the increasing mood across the country to challenge the government over membership of the EU.
Vote UK Out of EU has been set up by a businessman and the Electoral Reform Society will oversee a referendum in the constituencies of the Coalition leaders. The message has to be heard at some point - and the clarity of though displayed by Vote UK Out of EU is a lesson to the SNP, Cameron and others dithering over a vote on Scottish separation from the UK.
UKIP policy is that there should be a referendum on Scottish separation - it is Scotland's right to choice. UKIP, however, will campaign to keep the United Kingdom intact."
Vote UK Out of EU has been set up by a businessman and the Electoral Reform Society will oversee a referendum in the constituencies of the Coalition leaders. The message has to be heard at some point - and the clarity of though displayed by Vote UK Out of EU is a lesson to the SNP, Cameron and others dithering over a vote on Scottish separation from the UK.
UKIP policy is that there should be a referendum on Scottish separation - it is Scotland's right to choice. UKIP, however, will campaign to keep the United Kingdom intact."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)