Sunday, 20 December 2015


I've been interested in politics since for ever.

I really can't imagine why anyone wouldn't be. After all politics, quite literally, rules your life. It makes the laws you have to live by, it decides your taxes, and if your unlucky enough to need them, the benefits you get when you're sick or old or unemployed. It is in charge of your schools, hospitals, roads, rubbish collection...and almost everything else in your life.

There a bits of it that are tedious beyond belief, but, as it regulates every bit of your life, you'd have to be vaguely dense not to take an interest in it. 

(The fact that politicians don't really want you to take an interest should tell you something.)

I've believed for a very long time in an independent Scotland, and I played an enthusiastic, if small, part in the referendum campaign both here with Munguin, and out on the streets.

But for all my interest in politics, I have to say I have virtually no interest in the EU referendum. Maybe it's because I'm so sickened by the broken promises made by Cameron and Gordon Brown that I no longer care what happens to Britian. (Devo max, or devo super max as was promised by a Better Together representative on nationwide tv, has turned out to be a few relatively useless extra powers.) 

I've been a relatively enthusiastic supporter of the EU over the years. I've often been paid a salary from their funds, and I enjoyed an 'employment exchange' through an EU project where I worked at a University in France. In short it has been good to me personally.

But I've also seen many good projects paid for by EU matched social funding; projects that were able to do infinitely more because of money from Europe. I know too, that Scotland gets a far better deal from Europe than does England... Wales and Northern Ireland do even better than Scotland.

That said there are many things wrong with the EU, as there are with any government... not least the idiotic trek between Brussels and Strasbourg. I have no problem with Cameron trying to get one or two little changes made. I'd be happy if he would attack that one.

But, as you might expect for a politician like him, he is doing it all wrong. The whole point of the single market is that rules apply across the Union (the EU plus the countries of EFTA which join to make the European Economic Area). 

The EU doesn't tell people what benefits to pay, what taxes to charge, what their minimum wage should be, or many other things. All it says is that in a single market, what you do for your own people, you must do for others.

So, if you pay in-work benefits to your own population (because the wages are so pathetically low that people can't live on them), then you must do it for people from other EEA countries.

It's not a level playing field... or a single market... if only British people get tax credits, making them the only people who can afford to take low paid work and pay high rents.

Cameron has a problem with his back benchers who have a natural disinclination to like anyone who isn't English...and I do mean English as opposed to British. (Didn't Gideon Osborne say that Scots were a rowdy and disruptive element in the Commons?) 

Tory MPs don't like immigrants and they don't like foreigners telling Brits what to do. After all, the Brits ran a quarter of the world single handed. They don't need some damned foreigner telling them how to run dear old Blighty (or blighted).

I seem to have spent half my life listening to Tories, the Sun, the Daily Mail and Express and the Telegraph blaming everything on the EU, and immigrants, and foreigners in general. There's hardly a day goes by without one of these papers doing their damnedest to stir up racial tensions.

Never mind all the figures that show that EEA immigration has been incredibly good for the economy. Never mind that without them we wouldn't have any plumbers or electricians, our hospitals would fall apart and crops would lie mouldering in the fields.

Cameron will probably fail to get what he wants. Of course a population of 60 million is a huge market (although it seems to me that everything you see in the shops comes from sweat shops in China), so the other countries won't want to lose the UK from the union. But they have made it clear that there will be no treaty changes. These facts would get in the way of a good moan about damned foreigners.

Whatever he comes back with in February, it will not satisfy his Eurosceptic back benchers. And Britain may be moving closer and closer to an exit.

And, you know what? I don't care. There will be advantages and disadvantages of a Brexit, but the disadvantages will be more keenly felt here in the Celtic nations. (Unless the UK government can stump up a considerable amount for Northern Ireland, I can see there being a strong movement in the province, towards Dublin.)

There's a possibility that if Scotland votes heavily to stay in, and England votes to come out, then a second referendum will ensue. I doubt that could be a bad thing. 

Probably for that reason alone I will vote to stay in.

I'd like to know what you guys are feeling about it...


  1. I've lived in Germany for 40 years now, and I can guarantee that Cameron won't get any significant concessions, especially regarding EEA equality rules. Won't stop him trying to spin it as a victory for 'Remain', he has to stay in because big business (and the USA) want it. Still won't guarantee a 'Remain' vote, though.

    1. Thanks for that Ron. It's great to get a view from someone who lives at the centre of Europe.

      I'm inclined to agree.

      The USA wont be happy if their man in Europe is no longer in Europe. I doubt they will find such a useful puppet again, although if Sarkozy makes the presidency next time round, I guess he is lick-spittle material.

      I can see Britain being dropped by America if we are peripheral players.

      Tough eh?

  2. Tris

    Fist thing first, Cameron will be bricking it in case people vote to leave. He brought this on himself to appease right wing nutters in his party and UKip, and is now paying the price. I have no doubt that a deal has already be done that Cameron and his compliant media will big up, the EU will big it up but it won't change anything and that might just piss off enough of the English that they would to leave, if it's a vote to leave he is finished.

    Personally I don't really care enough, I think the EU pretty much is just the same old boys club dominated by France and Germany and the treatment of Greece, Spain and Portugal has left a very bad taste in my mouth to be honest. I think the vote will be close but it will be to remain.

    The EU has a lot wrong with it, it does some good but shows no sign of reform and is just the gravy train on a larger scale, the EU does not protect us in the areas that we need protecting so I am not that bothered. If they were to bring in tough laws on the minimum wage, minimum social security in line with Germany/France I might be happier but right now I just don't care enough either way

    I don't know how I will vote but leaning more towards leave, and I am not so sure it will bring about another referendum as not enough Scots will care enough to be honest, and the media would be so bias and people so gullible that I just think we would be out and that is that.


    1. I agree with you about the treatment of Greece (in particular).

      It seems to me that the single currency, although it has many advantages, had more disadvantages. We know that in reality a currency is only good for a very small area with an economy more of less equal. The pound for example works well for the City of London, but as Merv King once said, some unemployment in the North (Newcastle) is worth it to keep the economy going in London.

      I see your point about the fact that people may not care enough about in or out to be energised for yet another referendum, after the voting one, the Scottish one and the Europe one... It's something they will have to think about.

      The papers have spent years running down the EU in every possible way. The people may now react to that and vote Britain out.

      If it happens, we'll just have to suck it up, whatever it brings...

      I just wish we have a halfway competent prime minister, or foreign minister. But they are all such dickwits, in position because they went to the right school or have a lot of money.

  3. I am FOR anything the Daily/Sunday Mail is against ( and vice versa).

    1. Not a bad plan i guess.

      But I suspect that they may, having been against it since it started, suddenly find themselves for it, when their mates in big business start to get worried.

      It will be interesting to see how they play what they started.

  4. Cameron and his Tories want freedom of capital movement within the EU but not Labour.
    Freedom of movement of people and all the guaranteed common rights they have across state boundaries is fundamental to the EU and cannot be waived for one member state.
    If Cameron really wants that to happen, which I don't believe he does,then the only rational action is to remove the UK from the EU.
    He may get a few trinkets from his "devolution" negotiations, as has happened with Scotland/UK but the fundamentals must remain if we stay part of the union.

    1. That's pretty much they way I reckon it will go.

      You can;t have a free market without free movement of goods and people.

      If you make exceptions for Britain, why not for Portugal, Malta, Latvia, Lichtenstein, Poland... indeed everyone might want to pick and choose their opt-outs, then there would be no union at all.

      I can see them leaving.

  5. Apologies in advance Tris if this ends up as a bit of a rant.

    First up I am 100% with you about the absolutely ridiculous annual treks back and forth between Brussels and Strasbourg. Only a bunch of dunderheids could come up with that one just to appease the French, in my view.

    Next up is the idea that the annual accounts of the E.U. have NOT been signed off for over 20 years! I mean what other business or organisation would even be allowed to carry on in such a way.

    Third is the ridiculous way that M.E.P.'s can still, as far as I c an gather, claim for their *ahem* travel expenses and then travel by alternative cheaper methods without ever handing in expenses or travel tickets.

    Next, as you know I am a wee bit of a cynic so anything that Porky Hambone Cameron is FOR then I am definitively AGAINST! Purely on principle you understand. ANYTHING he stands for has to be BAD for Scotland.

    Finally I'm for voting NO just so that Hambone Cameron is stuffed good and proper because by the U.K. (England) voting NO then that will bring forward OUR independence! LOL

    1. You can have a rant here as often as you want, Arbroath.

      There are many things which could be simply dealt with. Expenses, as you point out is one; it's MONTHLY travel between Strasbourg and Brussels, a complete nonsense.

      But as far as I know the UK government doesn't get its accounts signed off. The Home office in particular has no idea what happens to it money, and hasn't since the beginning of time. Toffs are careless.

      Remember though, for the Scottish independence thing to work out, it has to be that Scotland votes STAY and England votes GO.

      And even then it may not, on the basis that not enough Scots will care one way of the other.

    2. To be honest Tris that was what I was thinking ... that Scotland would vote to stay I mean. LOL

  6. The Indyref showed how control of the MOT and the security services was a strong card for the establishment. I have no doubt the same dirty tricks will be played in the south as we were subjected to. They only have to win their vote once. I doubt a 45/55 result will see UKIP getting a 500% increase in membership.

    Then the EU itself will wade in with money to fund "In". Its what they did in Ireland is it not? And if the vote is to leave they will be sure to make it a neverendum - they have form.

    As to Scotland voting In/England Out triggering Indyref2? Aye, mathematically we can still qualify. A nation clutching at straws.

    On the matter itself, I think Scotland is better in - for reasons of market access, structural funds, influence in places - and I would think it was in our interest if were independent. The UK however, can do what it wants. Its a huge market - the biggest in the world for many EU exporters - and has run a trade deficit for as long as I can remember. So threats of trade restraints are BS ( but where have we heard BS dressed up as fact recently? ).

    I will vote to remain in, but I have no passion. Its not like the missionary zeal I have for my own country's independence.

    Saor Alba

    1. I have that lack of zeal too SA.

      Rather childishly, I like the idea of the Eton Pig being humiliated. I like the idea of the USA being cross with him and favouring France or Germany instead, as Obama has sometimes seemed to do. I like the idea of his inflated sense of self importance being forceably deflated for all the world to see. But as to the arguments, I'm relatively uninterested.

      I reckon that jobs would go in the car industry for example, where Japanese firms are in Britain so that they have free access to the market, but I'm finding it hard to get upset about that. how many car companies have massive factories in Scotland?

      Overall, I think they would be daft to come out, but I don't really care. In contrast, like you, I'm still passionate about getting free from the UK which I think is a millstone round our necks.

  7. y take is that Cameron wants whatever is good for his buddies in the City of London financial sector. That means a “yes, stay” victory, but only narrowly, which would leave open the threat of another referendum at any time. That would allow them to fend off any attempts by the EU to legislate or tax the financial markets and transactions, but let them continue to have the unrestricted access to European markets.

    I expect they will keep a sharp eye on the polls and adjust their MSM campaign accordingly, just like they did in the Scottish Independence referendum. The only question in my mind is how well they can manipulate public sentiment. I am not sure it will work as well the second time around – I suspect it is not only the Scottish populace that is becoming skeptical of the media. A lot of English Labour voters are watching the anti-Corbyn campaign closely, and they do not like what they see.

    1. I can;'t think of anyone I know who believes what they read in the press any more, and no one seems to trust the BBC.

      You're right that it was us moaning separatists that whined about how biased the press and BBC were, until they started attacking Mr Corbyn.

      In Scotland it's SNP Baaad. In England it's Corbyn Baaaad.

      I'm not sure they can depend ont eh papers to take the side of the Tories wets on this. The Mail and the Sun (the ones with mass influence) will find it difficult to recommend staying in the union seeing as for the last 30 years they have blamed almost everything there is to blame on Brussels.

      Suddenly supporting Cameron would be pretty hard for them to do.

  8. I will vote to Stay, not because I like the EU, but because I believe England will vote Leave. Anything that accentuates the difference between Scotland and England helps the independence movement in Scotland. If either country is forced to accept an unwanted result because of the way the other country voted, so much the better.
    When Scotland regains its independence I will support a party which wants to leave the EU.

    1. Fair enough Dan.

      I think though, that the only party that does support leaving would be UKIP (which presumably will have no place in an independent Scotland). Of course that doesn't mean that the supporters of UKIP in Scotland won't form SCIP... but let's hope if they do, they loose the Coburn.

      The man is a buffoon.

  9. I am a stay, mostly because though I have become annoyed with the EU and their many failures, they are still head and shoulders above the likes of the Westminster clique. I also like Dan will vote to stay because I will do anything to annoy those in England who have never changed, they are still in the mindset that they still run the world and anything which gets in the road of that is baaad.

    1. I'd certainly advise any independence supporter to vote to stay, if only because we need to have a distinct difference between Scotland and England. maybe Wales and Ireland too.

  10. I just think he is going through the motion to be seen to be tough to appease his right wing.

    Meanwhile the last Holyrood poll released by TNS has:

    58(nc)% SNP
    21(-3)% Lab
    12(nc)% Con
    4(nc)% Lib

    54(+2)% SNP
    20(-5)% Lab
    12(+1)% Con
    4(-1)% Lib
    9(+4)% Green

    1. I just posted this over on *ahem* another site Marcia.

      Just for a wee laugh I stuck the figures into the Scotland Votes seat calculator … cause I’m like that you see. :)

      Amazingly I appear to have ended up with the following result. I honestly think I must have done something wrong. 😀

      S.N.P. with 78 seats (winning every constituency bar the borders and Shetland)

      Labour with 25 seats (all regional list seats)

      Lie Dems with 2 seats (Shetland and one list seat)

      Greens with 9 seats (all list seats)

    2. I think he was daft to introduce it, Marcia. If he loses he's finished. He's split his party with some like the odious Fox demanding that cabinet ministers should be able to oppose him, and Clarke demanding that they must vote together. It's not going to change.

      He shouldn't have got involved in it.

      Just when they thought the Labour Party was pulling itself apart... the Tories are now doing it again.

      And all, as usual, over foreigners, which most of them hate.

      Great figures from TNS. Thanks for sharing them.

    3. ANOTHER SITE????? Arbroath? Is there such a thing?

      Good figures... I'm guessing that would give the Tories 15 seats including the Borders constituency.

      Would give us 87 pro independence and 42 unionists. Not bad figures at all.

      Excellent work

    4. Apparently there is Tris ... I came across it by *ahem* accident! LOL

      You are right about the Tories figures Tris I somehow *cough* missed them off my original post. LOL

      I agree that the figures are looking good Tris but as always, being the village idiot, I want them to be better! LOL

  11. We have relatives who are long term (over twenty years) resident in northern Germany, and we visit at least two - three times a year.

    In conversation with them and their German friends, it's very obvious that whether Britain leaves the EU or stays is a complete irrelevance to any of them. No-one cares what Britain chooses to do about anything much - they see us as more American than European...

    Also, reading the German newspapers, Britain gets rarely a mention in any context at all other than for the birth of a royal baby. For some reason they seem to lap that up!

    Given all that, I doubt whether Cameron will get much of a hearing in Europe when he's looking for special treatment for the UK.

    1. I wonder what kind of mind it is that expects special treatment in a club.

      The way I see it is, you join because you've weighed up the pros and the cons and decided that you are better off inside rather than out. If that s, you leave the club and apply to another one for membership.

      You don't expect everyone to change just for your good. Well, not unless you are a pompous upstart that thinks he's better than everyone else.

      It probably comes as a great surprise to many that no one much in Europe is interested in anything that Britain does. They've probably closed their ears to it all by now.

      But I've found that the most keen on royal babies are those who don't have to pay for them. And the Germans have just as many trashy magazines and the Brits do. Reading about third rate celebrities seems to interest certain people all over the world.

  12. A UK vote to leave based on England overruling everyone else would definitely be fertile ground for another bite at the independence cherry. Yesterday evening I was talking to a friend, a left-wing Scots Tory living here in Northern Ireland, who even said that a "Panama Canal" should be built across the Anglo-Scots border if the English were stupid enough to vote to leave. I was taken aback at his Damascene conversion, albeit one tied to certain conditions that may or may not come to pass.

    I'm not sure that there will be any great "movement" to join with Dublin in Northern Ireland in the event of Brexit, since Ulster Unionists' ethnic identity is very closely aligned to their constitutional identity in a way that simply isn't true of people in Scotland or Wales. That much won't change. I am fairly confident, however, that Northern Ireland will vote to stay in the EU, since the two communities are now of very similar size, and enough Unionist farmers will vote in accordance with their own self-interest. It is also quite likely that Unionists will split down the middle according to whether they have a liberal Ulster British identity or a more hardline Ulster Loyalist one.

    Sadly, I think it is quite likely that in the event of a British withdrawal from the EU and Scots independence, the Troubles would restart in Northern Ireland. EU spending to farmers and disadvantaged regions would not be made up, and there is a real risk of a "hard" Irish border. Even if people from either side continued to be free to travel in theory, there might well be customs restrictions. Apart from anything else, the Union would also look a lot more shoogly. In the medium term, although Unionists would continue to vote as they have always done, enough of the Catholic community — now very close to a voting majority — would be persuaded of a united Ireland to make it happen.

    1. Thanks very much for that insight into the Northern Ireland perspective, Anorak.

      I was aware that the province is the biggest recipient of EU expenditure in the UK, and like you I doubt very much that London would be prepared, or even able, to make up the loss that NI would take by leaving. In the meantime the Republic would continue to receive EU farming and social aid.

      More concerned about the troubles starting up again. I can see that it would probably be necessary to harden the border in the event of UK leaving the union, although that would be massively expensive. And I wonder how effective customs posts on the main roads would be.

      I hope, as the campaign progresses, you might be prepared to keep us informed about how things are going over there... A guest post is always appreciated :)

      I'm all for the canal idea by the way... :)

  13. I can understand the temptation to throw up your hands and say 'Don't care', but I feel that the stakes are too important for that.
    The EU may be incomprehensible or irritating, but it’s probably the least bad way of organising things in Europe. We’ve tried a system of competing power blocks in the nineteenth century, we’ve tried bilateral alliances of one sort or another, we’ve tried isolation, and for ten whole years in the last hundred we’ve tried war.
    So what’s wrong with being boring ? and sticking with the EU ?
    My grandfather who went from Biggar to fight in Flanders in 1916 and my father who left Orkney to fight in the second world war would certainly choose the boring EU over an international system which sent millions to their death. That’s more or less what they told me when they voted yes to Europe in the 1975 referendum.
    The basic argument for it hasn’t really changed.
    If the EU can bring together Germans, French and British who were at war with each other not long ago, bring in countries from the Baltics or the Balkans that didn’t use to exist, create space for small independent nations like Ireland, Denmark or Malta, support democracy in countries like Spain, Portugal or Greece that were military dictatorships and give freedom to countries under Soviet rule, then it’s got something going for it.
    Certainly, if I could explain to my grandfather and father how these countries are actually working together under one roof, they would think it was a miracle. They never had the luxury of not caring.
    These things take time to build up and are too important to throw casually away.

    I was also disgusted by the treatment meted out to Greece, for example. But don’t shoot at the wrong target - the real villain in that story is the ideology of austerity, it’s not “the EU”. It’s the ideology of the dismal political leaders who have been elected - through fear or ignorance - in their own countries, including of course those at Westminster.
    The decisions taken by countries in the EU simply reflect the ruling ideology of their national political systems. It’s bad that parties promoting austerity are in the majority, but face the real enemy - it’s much more important to attack the ideology head on and build alliances with the millions of people across Europe who are crying out for better economic policies. Not to run away from the EU.
    As for the Strasbourg-Brussels traveling circus, it seems mad to me, but the symbol of reconciliation across the Rhine for France and Germany is still quite strong for French and Germans. You could say, why indulge them ? The annual cost is a whopping 113.4 million euros. But that’s the equivalent of 23 cents per person in the EU per year. One day, we might need indulging too…let’s hope it’s not more expensive than that.
    It’s natural to put the issue of independence for Scotland somewhere near the top. But with independence comes the question of our place in the world. How we can secure a safer and more prosperous future for our country. Working with our neighbours is a vital step along that path.
    Going for Brexit for all the wrong reasons would mean that we start independence just fighting to keep our heads above water.

    1. Well, one thing is certain: if Scotland remains part of the so-called united kingdom, England's choice, vis-a-vis the EU, will always overwhelm Scotland's.
      First things first: Scotland must regain its independence, then negotiate with EU, NATO etc.

    2. Very interesting piece, Alan. Thanks for writing it.

      Of course I wouldn't dream of suggesting that the EU should disband.

      Like you I can see how it has drawn the countries of Europe together. There has been peace in the part of Europe that is the EU for 70 years. This must be the longest period of peace in Europe, possibly ever.

      And within the EU there is a measure of stability. We don't have coups. Spain, Portugal and Greece now democracies, the Eastern European countries part of the mainstream; also democracies, and even the ex Yugoslavian warring nations coming together under a democratic system, rather than being held together by a dictator (even a relatively benign one like Tito).

      But Britain has never fitted in. Just like De Gaulle said it wouldn't. They don't do "being a part of something". They have to be in charge.

      I think Scotland would be a reasonably good member of the EU not nearly as afflicted by self importance and superiority complex as the UK is. I think by and large we wouldn't have to find fault with everything that comes from Brussels, and I think we would not try to blame everything on Europe. A much more constructive relationship.

      As you say, working with our neighbours is important. The trouble is that Britain really doesn't. it seems more often to work against them. and as was said above, it really does appear to some at least, to be the 51st state of the USA.

      I take your point about the monthly trek. I wonder if they couldn't perhaps find another way of cementing their reconciliation. I accept that the cost is far less than keeping the Saxe Coburg Gothas in style, but there must be a more efficient way of running an administration. (There is certainly a more efficient way of having a head of state!!)

      Thanks again for your contribution.

    3. Dan, that's true of everything.

      At least in the EU every country has an equal say Germany can veto... and so can Malta.

      But in the UK, tehre are 650 MPs.

      NI has 18
      Wales has 40
      Scotland has 59
      England has 533


      In terms of population:

      NI has nearly 2 million
      Wales has just over 3 million
      Scotland has 5.5 million
      England has 53 million.

      We might as well not exist for all the difference we make.

    4. tris

      As a Independent nation Scotland as imagined by the nuts
      does not and never will exist..simple matter of fact over

    5. OK Niko. I guess you know best.

  14. snp drones

    Just hope England votes NO a majority of Scots vote YES
    then get all the chip on our shoulders whining hard done by
    downtrodden.....cry baby usual snp tripe ...
    the say we must have another Indy referendum

    which you will of course lose..again
    snp stratagem writ large...


    1. So did all the "independent" oil forecasters. The cash is still going to Westminster and not Edinburgh, and it's still a bloody bonus.
      How's that labour come back working?

    2. jimminy

      Yeah alright..I'm happy with it the point being starting
      from first principles socialism then winning elections although
      in my opinion democracy as allowed under capitalism has failed
      to deliver. unlike the new labour trick of always stressing win the next election at whatever cost. Claiming having the reins of power means you can mitigate the worst of capitalism ( meanwhile enriching yerselves )just as the snp are now doing its time for a new start and playing a longer game Labour now has 250.000 members that not a bad start.

    3. Indeed it's not bad re-start, but how many of those (especially the new) members will be absolutely be disgusted at the PLP?

      Who are these SNP, MSPs or MPs, that are lining their pockets due the position they now find themselves in? As I understand it, they have been making money from legitimate business practices, that they had before being elected.
      No one, from any party should be allowed, or able, to enrich themselves because of their political position; including using contacts made when in government subsequently used in "civilian" life.

    4. As you know Niko, I'm a supporter of Corbyn in that I think that the UK, and most especially England need a party of the left.

      But I worry that the right wingers, Blairites and the like will not allow it to happen. Many I supposed joined Labour when it was a centre/centre-right party of sellers of the family silver and bogus wars. That is where their hearts' lie. There are dozens of them that are total strangers to socialism.

      I don't blame them for that. They joined a party where socialism was a rude word. It's just that after 18 years of Thatcher/Major and 13 years of Blair/Brown and then 5 years of Cameron/Clegg, the public seems to have reclaimed their party... and the likes of Danczuk have no where to go now.

      And what of Scotland? What does Kezia stand for? Where in fact is Kezia?

      She seems more a Blairite than a Corbynite. Do you think she is keeping her powder dry in the hopes he will be overthrown by Benn or Burnham, or one of the other disappointed right wingers?

      Serious question...

  15. Can I copy and paste Arbroath's comments?

    My feelings exactly.


  16. Sort of re-inforcing what Alan said.

    We have had peace in the European Union since 1948. Given that the warring tribes of European Monarchs and their inheritors have caused great sadness in the world, I think the EU is a good thing.

    I recognise it's financial failings but I also recognise the simple fact that we are not fighting each other any more. Indeed, after the collapse of Yugoslavia, we embraced them.

    Rejecting that peace is something only a Conservative, brought up in killing 'others' milieu could embrace. Do we really, really want to be outside an organisation that, amongst others, has stopped the European fractiousness, which has killed numerous people from the United Kingdom as well as victims elsewhere?

    It seems to me that the Westminster Parliament is unwilling to give anything up in it's ludicrous claim to something near a Divine Right. For itself, naturally. Folk should wonder about that, this is the regieme that invented "concentration" camps, this is a regeime that bombed Iraq to oblivion and back again.

    If they were all honourable and honest, then oversight might be unneccessary, but they are not. Allowing that parcel of rogues to derogate from what is good about Europe, for instance the European Court of Human Rights, or a realistic policy on asylum seekers is just playing to the worst of the Daily Mail reading, little Englander philosophy of some people. To be as clear as I can be, I do not think we are being talked to honestly by Westminster politicians. Lallands Peat Worrier posted that the UK won almost all cases that went to the Court. Why, then, do they complain about the tiny minority they lost? It is almost certainly because they hate being contradicted.

    Has the Daily Mail apologised yet for supporting Oswald Moseley?

    There is something rancid at the heart of the UK, and, I, for one, want out of it.

    (I am not convinced that a huge majority of Scots for 'stay' and a vastly larger majority of English for 'Go' is the breaking point for sufficient Scots to rally to the independence cause. Nichola Sturgeon is probably right in keeping her tinder dry.

    For there will come an event that does deconstruct us.

    I have no exact idea about what that might be, but we as a nation are slow to rile, but once riled, well, look at the GE.

  17. Yes. I agree with that.

    To be outside of that seems to be something you'd have to think about very very carefully.

    I should care, but, I've lost any interest in the UK. It seems utterly foreign to me now.

    I'm sure it will not be long before Scotland is independent.