iScotland would have to "queue up" to join the EU, he said, for some
strange reason, while he was campaigning in the Newark by-election in England.
They care in Newark?
He also said he was disappointed that Scottish people living
in the rest of the UK would not be able to vote in September's independence
referendum. Although, as the referendum, by UK law, had to get the permission
of the UK government to take place, and was the joint responsibility of the UK
and Scottish governments in its range and methodology, it seems strange to
bring this up now and not before the Edinburgh Agreement was signed. Of course
it would have been almost impossible to ascertain who would have been eligible
to vote, and that is why it was not seriously considered. But people like
Cameron never let the truth get in the way of creating bitterness when it suits
their own political ends.
He said: "If Scotland vote for independence they are no
longer members of the EU and it's become clearer and clearer since this
campaign started that they would have to reapply to join the EU and as such, as
an independent country, they would have to queue up as it were behind other
countries - for instance those in the western Balkans that are already on the
path towards membership”.
Well that’s, at best, conjecture, and at
worst, lies. He must be the only person in the world who seriously believes
that an expansionist organisation like the EU would disfranchise Scottish
citizens, take away their passports, driving licences, and all their rights as
European citizens, at the same time as removing all the rights a privileges of
other EU states’ citizens to live, study, work in Scotland, and put them on
hold so that countries like Montenegro and Macedonia could take precedence over
them.
The scenario is too ridiculous to imagine. All EU students
at Scottish Universities would immediately be obliged to either return home in the
middle of their courses, or to pay steep fees for the rest of their education.
All fishing in Scottish waters would stop; all projects being funded by the EU
would immediately have no cash; Scottish people living overseas would become
aliens in their new countries, as would all the Europeans working here. And for
what?
Scotland, as a current member of the UK, and therefore the
EU, meets all the criteria of being a member of the EU. Why would they queue
behind countries which are working to bring their finances, human right, etc,
etc, into line with Europe, possibly taking decades to do so?
No one is suggesting it would be an overnight rubber
stamping. A new country would most likely have to negotiate terms, and no one
really expects that any of the opt outs, or penalties for these opt outs,
currently enjoyed or paid by the UK would necessarily continue. But most
intelligent and educated estimates are that, within a period of 18 months,
these issues could easily be resolved. East German territories and citizens,
after all, became a member overnight when accepted into reunified Germany.
On the other hand, when Greenland obtained the power from Denmark
to make its own decisions on these matters, and decided to withdraw from the EU,
it took it 2 years for the EU to reluctantly let it go.
Of course Mr Cameron could have sorted this uncertainty long
ago. It is in his hands to ask the EU for a judgement on Scotland’s position.
Mr Salmond has asked him to do this. He has refused. He prefers to be able to
play on fear. That is the kind of Prime Minister that Scotland has. One who
appears to be at war with the country. In short, an enemy.
For someone campaigning in an English by-election with
absolutely no connection to Scotland he made a great deal of independence. You
began to wonder if he hadn’t lost the plot as he rambled on about risks outside
the UK. Not being able keep the pound (lie), outside the UK you wouldn't have
such a strong economy with so many jobs…(another lie, as the economy in London
and Oxford is entirely different from anywhere in Scotland… and the unemployment
figures on a country wide basis being better in Scotland than in England). Then
there was the ever reliable “banks” tale. The British taxpayer saved the
Scottish banks. Except that that’s a lie too. The actual losses from banks
(which might have had Scotland in their titles, but are based in, and regulated
by London) in Scotland was tiny. The Scottish liability could easily have been
paid. The massive losses came in London and in the USA. And the USA liabilities
were, by law, paid by the USA government.
It seems to me that if you have to rely on lies for ALL your
arguments, you actually don’t have anything. Cameron must be thanking his lucky
stars for a compliant press and a BBC that desperately needs his English
Culture Secretary to raise the licence tax.
In conclusion with sickening predictability he said: “I
think the UK has been a great success story”.
Tell that to people on the receiving end of Iain Duncan
Smith’s Department of Wickedness and Purgatory (DWP). Tell that to all the
people forced to live on the lowest comparative minimum wage and the lowest
pension in Europe. Tell that to people paying the highest fares for the worst
trains in Europe, or the most money for the smallest houses, the most expensive
petrol, cars, furniture etc… The list is endless.
Statements like that remind me of the speech made by the prince
of Wales, welcoming some immigrants to England where he said: “I’ve always considered
myself extremely privileged to be born British.” No seriously, he did!
