91热爆

91热爆 wrote:
The prime minister launched a Labour campaign which warned that without Britain Scotland could "end up broke".

拢20Bn for Trident to be based in Scotland when none of us want it.............
拢10Bn for the London Olympics which will barely even affect the north of England.........

Meanwhile, we supply billions in North Sea Oil Revenue, we are self sufficient in power generation, water, food and tourism.

Something tells me that B-Liar has his figures back to front

Using scare tactics like saying it will cost 拢5000 extra tax if Scotland gets independence will back fire on labour as they don't have a good record at the moment and the snp are percved as more honest.

Much truths in BT's Blog. As an 'undecided', I have recently decided to vote SNP. Two reasons: [1] Tony and [2] Blair.
The tone of recent attacks show his worries are even greater than the last election.
As for his argument independence would cost me more than 拢5,000, I suddenly remembered he also advised me Iraq had WMDs! Once bitten...
Add to that the staggering costs of Trident, the cost of London 2012 and so on, it really becomes just one soundbite too many from him.

Brian

The SNP's overall strategy in this election needs a good deal of scrutiny, which it hasn't had up till now. Most of their policies are 'costed' at artificially low values - like local income tax set at 3p, when that won't raise nearly as much revenue as the Council Tax that it is meant to replace. And there are pledges to give lots of extra money to students, ex-students, business owners, pensioners and anyone else with a few spare votes. None of which, apparently, require any extra taxes to pay for them.

Seen alongside the "pick a fight with Westminster" approach, it seems to me that all three of your suggested explanations make a bit of sense. No need to actually deliver these policies, just get Westminster to refuse to pick up the bill, and then blame 'London', and get lots more TV coverage for Alex in the meantime.

PS Can I just add: Stirling Albion 2 Morton 1 ,as I like seeing that in print too !

Labour's campaign appears to be in chaos, but Labour still seem to be doing quite well when you consider all the negative publicity over Cash for Peerages, Trident etc and lack of coverage of labour party policy (although that is the fault of the party). The SNP are not doing that much better than they did in 1999 and if they don't win this time they may never, which is probably what is driving their campaign.

So I wonder if when the Labour campaign finally gets going properly they will simply overturn the SNP's lead in the polls, after all their message seems strong it just has not been covered as much as the SNP's campaign. There is also the possibility of a boost from the budget on Wednesday.

Why no coverage of the labour press conference today in which the First Minister attacked the SNP much more so than he did when he made a speech a few months which received wide spread coverage. No wonder labour is doing badly in the polls when labour gets no coverage, if Gordon Brown had said what Jack McConnell did it would probably lead the news. But yet Alex Salmond gets widespread coverage for launching his 100 day plan, most of what was in the plan we already knew about.

Brian,

I was wondering if under the freedom of information act would one be able to look at the figures concerning the oft talked about North Sea oil reserves? I mean, I keep hearing some folk say they are running out, some say there is an abundance and some say nothing at all! If there were indeed rich reserves of oil left it would be a vital platform for the SNP to build a campaign on. I can see money being at the root of many political debates this election, but for me the main reason to vote SNP would be independence no matter what the cost, as the foreign adventures of Westminster tar Scotland also. We need to be in control of our own destiny if this country is to have a chance of fulfilling it's potential.

Just a thought but it may be possible for Scotland to gain independence without the need for the SNP. If, or when, the Tories return to power at Westminster the West Lothian question will become far more prominent. A growing band of south east Tory backbenchers will demand fewer powers for Scots MPs.("Why do they get to vote on our stuff when we can't vote on their's") David Cameron will need these MPs to push through his policies. Scottish MPs will end up powerless. Devolution will not be discarded. Therefore the natural outcome will be eventual seperation due to irreconcilable dfferences.

Scots are beginning to see that voting for politicans in an independent Scotland will provide infinitely more "personal clout" than being totally ignored by a Westminster government. If this realisation becomes widespread enough it will put Salmond into power. That scares the living daylights out of Blair. We all know New Labour have traditionally relied on Scottish votes to get into government.

why oh why dont the partys in scotland all get together and sort out the independance thing and hold a referendum together after all its the will of the scottish people. or are the non independance partys that scared that the scottish people might just vote for something that they do not want. because their little egos do not lie at home personally if we did vote for independance i dont think we can be any worse of than we are now

As an English immigrant to Scotland (well naturalised after 20 years; Hibs 5 Kili 1 - do like seeing that in print!), I do find the Labour-SNP 'battle' increasingly bizarre. Neither appear to be based on analysis but simply on an 'Old Firm-like' dislike of the other... as if one is born SNP or Labour but, in matters other than the constitution, they are becoming increasingly alike - sucking up to business, tweaking taxation this way and that in an attempt to 'reduce' taxes for everyone, contradictory on the environment (climate targets but motorway building), better health/education services for less cost, etc. Thank goodness for some difference on Iraq and Trident.

That said, when are we going to see some mature debate about the constitution? Whether independence will cost more or less is irrelevant - and depends on the post-independence policies of the then Government. Those are wholly unknown - after all, the SNP is a cobbled-together mix of left, right and 'other' wings - which, post-independence would revert to 'traditional' political ideologies as in all other 'normal' countries. This is the weakness of the "divorce is expensive" argument. However, by contrast, the SNP also appears ill at ease - it doesn't really know if its a civilised, inclusive party seeking civic nationalism for all residents of this patch of the planet (wherever they are from), or a slightly xenophobic (or at least anti-english) party of pure bred Scots. Many 'official' statements suggest the former, but scratch the surface at a conference or in its supporters' comments on blogs etc, and there is plenty of the latter.

So, who to vote for? So far, I can only conclude a "plague on both their houses". Hopefully, one or the other will become more inspiring (especially as the Tories and LibDems are equally uninspiring!). At present, I can think of good arguments both for, and against, independence - but neither of the big parties seem to deploying logical, analytical arguments, preferring it seems the simplistic "they're wrong" or "they'll cause conflict".

Talking of conflict - of course, Mr Salmond will seek arguments with London. He's a nationalist, doh! That said, to be credible he must pick a few, credible fights while seeking to govern well at the same time. This does seem to be his intention (although not said clearly enough - is this to please his 'fundamentalists'?). Moreover, I suspect his Government have more trouble with his parties own internal divisions. After all, how can it meet its binding climate targets while pleasing climate change denying, motorway building Fergus Ewing; or devise economic policies to please both the business-pleasing Jim Mather and the quasi-socialist Alex Neil.

Still undecided, but at least we have a trophy this season - unlike Dundee United!

Brian
Your suggestions like much of what the 91热爆 reports these days as news is nonsense
The only people who are interested in what Salmond and Sturgeon peddle in his pals in Perthshire .He does not speak for me and is the last person i would want to do so.
Who is going to pay for the bureaucracy that Salmond will create his rich pals.?
Where does he think we wont be attacked simply because we dont have trident.
He advocates going into the Euro this means a seperate cuurency who is going to pay for this ?.Who is going to pay for defence or are we not going to bother ?.Who is going to pay for the civil servants to run the bureaucracy which will appear overnight
Sir George Matheson only represents the financial community.He doesnt speak for everyone.So what is Salmond and Sturgeon going to do once the multi nationals pull out blame it on the UK govt ?.
This document that Brian barely mentioned where does the bold Alex get off in this .What gives him the right to provoke a clash with Westminster and may i remind u Brian Defence has nothing to do with Holyrood . Yet Salmond and his sidekick keep mouthing off about something they have no influence over.
Most people are not interested in this pipe dream that Alex and Nicola and by the sound of it 91热爆 scotland are so desperate to achieve.

Interesting analysis - although I think the Trotskyite analogy is a wee bit harsh. If the SNP form a government (and this will require support from others in all probability), then I would want them to push the boundaries of the present devolution settlement. After all, if the SNP win the election then the "settled will of the Scottish People" slogan will become as anachronistic as the Union itself!

The "100 days" document is merely a reflection of the sense of confidence that the SNP have tapped into and stimulated over the last few years. This is a very welcome and healthy develoment in the Scottish psyche in my view, and given this, the demands in the document are hardly surprising or purely tactical. They have merit - not that the Labour Party will find much in it - the scaremongering and negativity has increased by a few quantum leaps, and not for the last time before the 3rd of May!

Brian having just watched the evening News and wee Jack's' QUALITY' top table with him to try and scare Scotland again any of the 3 routes you have suggested will suffice to get rid of this unqualified bunch.
I bet someone had to tell them who Sir
George Mathewson was?

This contribution from Brian Taylor begs a question or two. One of these is just what is his role in the run-up to the election ? Is it to report the news or make the news ? A blog like this does not report the news around the election, and could be argued to seek to influence the outcome of the election. Is that a role for Brian Taylor and the 91热爆 ?
One other question. 'The Road to Success' - just what is meant by 'success' in this context and how can one measure whether it has been achieved ? From what little there is in Brian's blog which elaborates on the headline, I can only imagine he equates success with winning an election. Winning elections may seem like success to Brian and the politicians he enjoys keeping company with. For ordinary people who look to government to redress imbalances and injustices, real and perceived, winning an election is but one step in a long, hard journey.
Perhaps Brian could invite Colin Fox and Robin Harper to explain why they, not Labour & the SNP, would be better in government. Or does Brian think that they don't count in the coming election ?

seems strange that Salmond, the man who fled to Westminster rather than stay in Scotland, appears to be trying to stop son of trident when this will not happen for some years ahead but I suppose that it grabs the headlines. It is also ironic that because their leader is in Westminster that "Scotland's party" is the one thats controlled from London!!!

PS nice to see Hibs winning some silverware this season, next the Scottish Cup - I can but dream.

Brian, it is good to see a 91热爆 blog about Scottish politics.

Unfortunately Labour's attitude to the SNP support of late has echoed (too well) the Conservative 'Save The Union' campaign ten years ago. Although I was far more inclined to believe in John Major's sincerity than Mr Blair's.

I am not voting SNP, although recent research has made me think that independence might not be the utter disaster I used to fear. I have yet to hear Mr Salmond offer anything more than attacks on the Prime Minister himself and on drawing on the emotive, amorphous spirit of 'Scottishness'.

I would also like to hear an SNP answer about what Scotland would do about its share of the UK National Debt were it to separate from England. That sum doesn't seem to figure in any literature of theirs I can find. Perhaps someone on here could correct me if I am wrong!

Now Brian, am I correct that the SNP has presented at least some policies at the forefront of their campaign: policies that are open to debate and scrutiny?

On the other hand, I am only aware from recent press and television coverage of a rather over the top completely negative presentation from Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jack McConnell et al. Thus far the appearance is of New Labour fighting a "You'ld better be scared of independence" campaign, while the SNP doesn't hide the fact it wants independence, but is also leading on at least some other policies.

Now, I don't agree with everything I've heard about SNP policies, but I do in some areas. From New Labour, all I hear is very negative carping about the other side. If things remain like this, I don't really have much of a choice, do I?

And although I don't support Dundee United, they are at least fielding some Scots, while Hearts seem to hate considering Scots...aha, is there a subtle analogy here?

Dear Brian/ Bloggers,

You may be interested to note that the "document" launched today is unavailable on the SNP website.

What does it contain that the SNP don't want us to see?? Hmm...

On another tack - is there an online way of finding out who you're Scottish Election candidates actually are??!!

It's frustrating that I can't seem to discover this easily. Perhaps this is a ploy designed to lure us into the false notion that only SNP or Labour candidates will be put forward??!!

Cheers the noo,

Reiver

P.S. Cool blog, Brian

Mr McConnell came out fighting yesterday ?? Err.. not from where I'm standing. He was certainly carping from the sidelines. But until he gets involved in serious debate with Salmond no one is going to take him seriously.
I remember Labour used to attack the SNP for having no policies.Labour are now fighting an election to keep the status quo.No new policies,nothing to ignite the electorate.
To be honest Labour look tired and jaded,devoid of ideas

I will definitely vote for the SNP on May the 3rd. And even if independence does cost me 拢5,000 extra.....which i do not think it will

who do I make the cheque payable to???

This is about more than money...Blair, Brown, Reid, Browne, Alexander and the other separation scaremongers do not seem to get that.

Surely the easiest way to highlight the impending failure of an SNP-Scotland would be to table a motion in the House of Commons demanding a change to the Barnett formula? The resulting change in the distribution of fuding to the health system would show how unreasonable the SNP's policies are.

I was an undecided, but have gone for the snp, if i have to pay extra income tax so that my children can have a smaller class then so be it.I would rather pay a bit extra to make sure people who need it get free health care.it works in other counties why not here.
I keep hearing how small a country we are and how we will never survive without england, why? is there no other small countrys out there or have they all collapsed.
I dont want tridant or the iraq war, or tony blair, whos policies seam to be for the southern english, lib/lab have done nothing as far as i can see and are happy to sit in power with westminster telling them what to do.

The debate centres continually around Scotland's economic viability should it become an independant nation. It's frankly ludicrous that with Ireland as an example across the ocean that Labour persist with this line of reasoning.

Regardless of Brown's twitterings of economic stability we've become a nation of minimum wage supermarket workers and telesales operatives. A walk around my home city of Aberdeen and the burgeoning industries seem to be pubs, charity shops and take-away's.

To quote Ross above 'This is about more than money...'. To give in to the rhetoric that Scots can't govern their own sovereign state is to lose the last semblance of pride and dignity slowly seeping from this nation.

We have a great history of political thinkers, economists, reformers, industrialists etc. A vote for the SNP is a vote of confidence in Scottish ability to govern.

One problem for Jack and Labour with the " Years of Wrangling" line is that I suspect that the SNP has choosen the powers they want to highlight quite cleverly.

They are probably things that most Scots think the Scottish Parliament should have control of anyway.

If most people in Scotland agree with the SNP that Scotland should have control of Gun Legislation then Labours line just becomes

" We mustn't ask for that, London wouldn't like it".

I just can't see that being a vote winner for Scotland.

Peter.

I'd be interested to hear the SNP's plans re the RAF bases in Scotland. Living near to Lossiemouth and Kinloss, I know this area would be devastated if either / both were to close. How could the SNP justify keeping RAF bases in an independent Scotland? Likewise with trident - as much as I abhor nuclear weapons, I can imagine the effect on the local economy if trident was disposed of.

I was born in Scotland have an ex wife who's English, my children are half breeds! And I'm about to marry my second wife who is also English and I'm a member of the SNP. Therefore you don't have to be a racist, bigotted idiot to want independence for your country. It's simply our own voice, on our own challenges socially or otherwise, to ensure a secure future and destiny awaits on 3 May 07. All parties twist facts to suit an arguement, whole truths, half truths whatever - the fact is the SNP will stand up for Scotland and determine our future with the electorates' support. It isn't anti English it's anti Westminster and the lies that exudes from that cesspit!

It's Time

I love it when Labour are running scared, in the Daily(Labour)Record today it is the end of ship-building in Scotland if SNP come to power, it is pathetic, negative electioneering are a turn off for everyone, roll on May 3rd.

I studied in Helsinki for a year and for the 1st time my vote will be going to the SNP, thier arguments make so so much more sense now.

All I think whenever I hear Tony or Jack spew forth thier insulting rants about Scotland, I just imagine them taking the same line with Norway, Finland or Ireland. They would literally be laughed out of the room.

One should vote SNP for one reason above all, foreign policy.
Cook's Ethical Foreign Policy went the way of all flesh when it came up against the orders of "Our Gallant Allies". We might be poor if independent, but at least we could be honest.
Now remind me again, what did they ever do for us that was not absolutely in their direct natioanl interest-ever?

mr blair doesn't seem to have been asked to explain his 拢500 figure. he can just say anything he wants. Do we really believe a word he says these days.
Labour don't seem to be able to get any figures right. London Olympics budget is way wrong and we still have a few years to go before its built. Holyrood was a disater for costing. Scotland won't forget that in a hurry
How much has labour borrowed over its years in office to pay for services? How long will we be paying what they've spent back?
Time to more over tony and gordon Talk about the terrible two's!