"I love Scotland. I want the best for our nation."
Strange then that when he was prime minister of the UK he was asked by the American press where he came from and he replied "I'm from North Britain".
Am I the only one who thinks that it is strange for someone who loves his country to be ashamed to admit that he is Scottish.
Given that he is promising (why, he's a back bench part time "ex-politician") all kinds of extra super devolution if we vote no, and thinks that this is the "best for our nation", why, when he was Prime Minister and had it in his power to do something about Scotland's half baked devolution (where almost every halfpenny it spends comes in the form of a block grant utterly dependent on the whims of spending of the UK government), did he not do something about sorting out the devolution mess that Blair had left?
He continues "A no vote will guarantee faster, better and safer change. Change that will unite the people of Scotland".
Firstly, I am aware of the pledge that the two main party leaders have signed. Change apparently starts on the 19th. (Incidentally, I have to admit to being somewhat amused by the fact that they included Nick Clegg. I mean the words "Nick Clegg has signed a pledge" seem, not unreasonably, to be met universally with derision. The likelihood that Clegg won't even be in parliament to lead a dozen or so remaining Liberals after the next UK election adds to the amusement.) The pledge is, of course a load of meaningless drivel as demonstrated by Stuart here.
And this segment of the Andrew Neil programme shows that the two parties don't know what they are doing, and far from agree on what will be devolved.
But let's be honest. Quite apart from Clegg, whose weasel words are worth nothing, who believes anything that Cameron or Miliband say?
In reality, referendum out of the way, the most important thing for both the main parties will be winning the next UK election. If Scotland votes no, although doubtless they will set up some sort of dialogue, the thrust of their efforts will be to outdo UKIP and win a majority in the London parliament.
The big problem with more powers for Scotland is that more devolution will have to be approved by the Houses of Commons and Lords with their massive majority of non Scots.
And how likely is that to happen?
Well, I'd have thought, not very.
That Chope can say that, indicates that Cameron is on his way out. Unless of course he is making it up, I suspect that Conservative MPs are no longer particularly loyal to Cameron. Given the situation in the Labour Party with Miliband, I imagine there may be more than a few who think that Ed won't ever be in a position to make them foreign secretary or get them a knighthood.
Can you imagine these MPs all over England, fighting off a challenge from UKIP and trying to tell their constituents that they will vote for more powers for Scotland, and less from themselves? Nope, me neither
Brown ends with: "A NO vote will guarantee a stronger Scottish parliament and we will keep the UK pension, the UK pound, the UK passport, and stay at the heart of a changing United Kingdom."
In fact the No vote will not create a stronger parliament. It will be the same parliament which can be abolished by the sovereign government (as Northern Ireland can attest to).
We will keep the UK pension anyway. We have paid for pensions; we will continue to benefit from them. The DWP has already confirmed this, but Brown, for some obscure reason either refuses to believe that, or willfully ignores it and lies through his teeth.
We already use a European Union passport which guarantees us assistance at any European embassy or consulate, and in any case, for those who wish to retain a EU UK passport, the option is there to do so.
We will use the pound with or without currency union, but almost certainly with (as the UK cannot afford to lose the Scottish export contribution to its balance of payments.
As for staying at the heart of a changing UK, firstly, many of us don't like the way the UK has changed and is continuing to change. The neo-liberal philosophy "if it doesn't make money get rid of it" doesn't suit everyone.
Secondly we are not at the heart of it, never have been. We are peripheral and unimportant. London is at the heart of it. Where the money is; where the power is.
Maybe we'd like to be at the heart of a Scotland that will definitely be changing, but changing the way WE want it to change, instead of the way Huntingdonshire, Hertfordshire and the City of London want it to change...
...and one that we can genuinely say we SHALL be at the heart of.
