There was a Michelle Mone type post on a Guardian blog from someone who claimed he and his wife were leaving Scotland on a 'Yes vote' so they would not be under the thrall of Dictator Eck and a Scotland going rapidly to hell in an economic hand basket, defaulting on loans while rapidly becoming a pariah state and a laughing stock in the world - as per Better Together propaganda.
In answer, I reflected on how a future English Border Agency, if this Better Together gone mad situation came to pass, would look on them using the current UK Border Agency as a template. I suggested they would be stopped at the border, not being native English they would be moved to an internment camp along with other 'illegals' where they would have to apply for political or economic asylum in England. While there they would have little access to legal advice, no access to benefits, no access to NHS England (accept in a life or death emergency and even then they would be billed) and unless they had a large wodge of English pounds or could prove they would help the English economy by undertaking work not filled by English people they would be sent back to the borders of Scotland and repatriated.
In the real world; if it is a 'No vote' Westminster have made it very clear there will be less, not more devolution in Scotland. Labour's Mr Docherty stated publicly there is no desire at Westminster to give Scotland any greater devolution than at present. This in the face of 60% of Scots stating they wish more not less devolution.
If Scotland wishes to take real control over such issues as taxation, welfare, the removal of nuclear weapons, preventing fracking, ensuring a fairer country for all its residents, maintain a NHS service free, reducing poverty, increasing opportunity, improving access to child care, then all this can only be achieved by voting 'Yes'.
Westminster was asked to put forward a FFA bill to establish what Westminster would do if there was a majority for greater devolution / FFA. Westminster refused and demanded the referendum be a polar 'Yes/ No' because they thought they were in control and would win easily.
The parties at Westminster are still refusing to state what Scotland would look like after a 'No vote', as requested by the UK Electoral Commission, because to do so would give the Yes campaign an unassailable lead.
Here's the reality; you can believe all the nonsense peddled about Alex Salmond wearing the Earl O'Hell's waistcoat, by people who have a vested interest in making him the subject of the referendum as a hate figure, vote No and watch Scotland's NHS crumble, welfare fall to bits, council tax rise exponentially, homelessness and poverty rising - which will all be features of the £4 billion cut to Scotland's budget promised on a 'No' vote by Westminster.
On the other hand you can stop listening to the 'We hate Eck!' lobby and think for yourself.
Given the track record of Holyrood on the NHS in Scotland, seeking to reduce the impact of the bedroom tax, freezing council tax, introducing home care for the elderly and infirm, building one of the world's biggest reusable development centres for both wind and tidal energy, encouraging inward investment to Scotland higher per capita than the famous London and the SE, creating record levels of full time employment in Scotland, leading the UK out of austerity (according to the CBI). Then ask yourself just who is more likely to look after Scotland's best interests and which Parliament, Holyrood or Westminster, is more accountable to the Scottish people on a daily basis?
Under Scots Law and constitutional practice the considered will of the people of Scotland is always paramount. This constitutional reality in the current Union is why the referendum is happening in the form it is, under the control of Holyrood and is why the result is binding, this fundamental constitutional reality has driven Scottish law and politics since 1328 - we the Scottish people are sovereign, our will is paramount. We have the opportunity to reassert our will as a sovereign people in September. An assertion of Scottish sovereignty which Westminster will tell any lies, run outrageous scare stories, poison as many ears as possible and vilify those who are seeking a Yes vote in what ever way they can and scream and scream and scream, like Elizabeth Bott, until they are sick to prevent from happening.
Alex Salmond is not the real issue, in fact he is no issue at all, except in those frightened of their own shadows, hiding behind the curtains or sofa, self justifying their anti Wee Eck position like mad.
What sort of Scotland you wish to leave future generations is the only issue.
A neo-liberal rubbish tip packed with nuclear weapons, debt and poverty or a country of potential and opportunity for all who have the gumption to seek it with out the requirement of a silver spoon in the gob?
In answer, I reflected on how a future English Border Agency, if this Better Together gone mad situation came to pass, would look on them using the current UK Border Agency as a template. I suggested they would be stopped at the border, not being native English they would be moved to an internment camp along with other 'illegals' where they would have to apply for political or economic asylum in England. While there they would have little access to legal advice, no access to benefits, no access to NHS England (accept in a life or death emergency and even then they would be billed) and unless they had a large wodge of English pounds or could prove they would help the English economy by undertaking work not filled by English people they would be sent back to the borders of Scotland and repatriated.
In the real world; if it is a 'No vote' Westminster have made it very clear there will be less, not more devolution in Scotland. Labour's Mr Docherty stated publicly there is no desire at Westminster to give Scotland any greater devolution than at present. This in the face of 60% of Scots stating they wish more not less devolution.
If Scotland wishes to take real control over such issues as taxation, welfare, the removal of nuclear weapons, preventing fracking, ensuring a fairer country for all its residents, maintain a NHS service free, reducing poverty, increasing opportunity, improving access to child care, then all this can only be achieved by voting 'Yes'.
Westminster was asked to put forward a FFA bill to establish what Westminster would do if there was a majority for greater devolution / FFA. Westminster refused and demanded the referendum be a polar 'Yes/ No' because they thought they were in control and would win easily.
The parties at Westminster are still refusing to state what Scotland would look like after a 'No vote', as requested by the UK Electoral Commission, because to do so would give the Yes campaign an unassailable lead.
Here's the reality; you can believe all the nonsense peddled about Alex Salmond wearing the Earl O'Hell's waistcoat, by people who have a vested interest in making him the subject of the referendum as a hate figure, vote No and watch Scotland's NHS crumble, welfare fall to bits, council tax rise exponentially, homelessness and poverty rising - which will all be features of the £4 billion cut to Scotland's budget promised on a 'No' vote by Westminster.
On the other hand you can stop listening to the 'We hate Eck!' lobby and think for yourself.
Given the track record of Holyrood on the NHS in Scotland, seeking to reduce the impact of the bedroom tax, freezing council tax, introducing home care for the elderly and infirm, building one of the world's biggest reusable development centres for both wind and tidal energy, encouraging inward investment to Scotland higher per capita than the famous London and the SE, creating record levels of full time employment in Scotland, leading the UK out of austerity (according to the CBI). Then ask yourself just who is more likely to look after Scotland's best interests and which Parliament, Holyrood or Westminster, is more accountable to the Scottish people on a daily basis?
Under Scots Law and constitutional practice the considered will of the people of Scotland is always paramount. This constitutional reality in the current Union is why the referendum is happening in the form it is, under the control of Holyrood and is why the result is binding, this fundamental constitutional reality has driven Scottish law and politics since 1328 - we the Scottish people are sovereign, our will is paramount. We have the opportunity to reassert our will as a sovereign people in September. An assertion of Scottish sovereignty which Westminster will tell any lies, run outrageous scare stories, poison as many ears as possible and vilify those who are seeking a Yes vote in what ever way they can and scream and scream and scream, like Elizabeth Bott, until they are sick to prevent from happening.
Alex Salmond is not the real issue, in fact he is no issue at all, except in those frightened of their own shadows, hiding behind the curtains or sofa, self justifying their anti Wee Eck position like mad.
What sort of Scotland you wish to leave future generations is the only issue.
A neo-liberal rubbish tip packed with nuclear weapons, debt and poverty or a country of potential and opportunity for all who have the gumption to seek it with out the requirement of a silver spoon in the gob?
No comments:
Post a Comment