WINGS OVER SCOTLAND NAILS IT

A few weeks ago I published a copied post detailing ten advantages of being independent. 


One of the most startling points made in this post was the fact that we would be much richer as an independent nation (according to OECD figures the 6th richest nation on Earth).


Whilst that is pretty important (I'd like to live like a Norwegian), probably the most important aspect of independence for me is that we would no longer be tied down to a choice of government by one of two political parties, pitching much the same policies to people who live at the other end of the UK. 


I didn't include the Liberal Democrats in the "parties of government" because, under the voting system that we have, there is no chance of them being in government, except as, at present, the junior partner in a coalition.  If Mr Clegg had held out for a referendum on Proportional Representation instead of the silly fudge that he accepted and almost no one wanted, this might have been a thing of the past. Now it will not happen for a very long time, even if the Liberals survive their time with the Tories.

I've suggested to unionists who read this blog that they might want to come up with a list of advantages for Scotland in staying in the union. No one, to date, has ventured a single one advantage.


The leader of "Scottish Labour" has said that we are better off and stronger together. I don't know what she means by that. It sounds like a cliché to me. Stronger in what way? Economically? Militarily? Physically? Better off in what way? Economically? The figures suggest otherwise.


Certainly she may be agreeing with Cameron that Britain packs a punch in Europe...although that's a someone dubious notion. 


Perhaps Ms Lamont agrees with the prime minister that Britain's fighting force (one of the largest in the world) is an advantage of our union. He remarked that the UK was either respected or feared because of that. 


I think he forgot to mention "ridiculed". I'm not talking about the quality of the men. I'm sure most of them are fine, but the situation is a bit fur coat and no knickers.  Britain can fight wars but it has poor equipment and kit, and the men's rations are pathetic in comparison to American or French soldiers. 


It's also a source of amusement to some that although our troops are out there with the Americans, standing shoulder to shoulder, we have 1960s railways/hospitals/roads/bus service/education...etc. 

Mrs Lamont may think that being a permanent member of the security council is important. I suspect it's another of these things that we are supposed to swallow without analysing in what way it is good for you and me.


Cameron got misty eyed at his speech in Edinburgh when he talked of the history that our two countries shared, as if on independence we would no longer share that history (which incidentally has been that of independent nations for far more of the time than it has been as a union). But then  education at Eton ain't what it used to be...certainly not if that is what they turn out.


Having failed to hear any sensible arguments for staying together, I was interested to read this Wings over Scotland post today. It lays out very clearly the disadvantages in staying in the union, by describing what the current set up is; how little we are offered; how undemocratic our country is. As I said earlier, two (he says three) parties pitching the same policies to the South East of England.


I think that every Scot should read this post, and certainly anyone campaigning for an independent Scotland should know it off by heart.


My heartiest congratulations and thanks to the Rev Stu. It's just a superb post.