SINCE 1945 Unionist predictions of the promised land to the people of Scotland have come to precisely nothing, but they are still being given credibility and traction by Westminster.
There are two distinct aspects to Scotland`s condition, aspects that are vital to the understanding of the growing discontent afflicting what ought to be a successful, happy country.
Scottish Nationhood was not for sale in 1707. The political independence, only, of our country was sold for “30 pieces of silver” by a small group representing the establishment, and ceded to the parliament of England. The effect of that and its destructive repercussions to Scotland are far greater than could have been predicted, and would otherwise have produced a different result.
The Act is an anachronism, long overdue for repeal. It is patently not fit for purpose, nor was it ever.
The Scottish Parliament established constitutionally in 1999 removed some dissatisfaction with the Westminster brand of democracy historically practised, but shortcomings, flaws in that new negotiated agreement were soon seen by both parties thereto, dominated by the detailed Devolved and Reserved Matters, together with the electoral system imposed by Westminster.
Immediately after September 2014, EVEL and the effects of the democratic deficit resulting, directly, from the 1707 Act, a situation has been at Westminster enshrined to determine that constituency MPs from Scotland will for all future time be prevented from influencing the affairs of England, of Great Britain, and many of those of the Nation of Scotland itself.
A dispassionate scrutiny of the Westminster government’s actions since September 2014, and of those of the present administration will satisfy the accuracy of that assertion. Those actions are supported unequivocally by the three London-based political Parties, and can therefore be taken as the ethos of Westminster.
The people of Scotland have rejected the actions, the policies of the Conservative Party for over 60 years, and there is no evidence that either of the two others would alter the condition in which the people of Scotland find themselves.
All economic affairs of Scotland were the exclusive prerogative of Westminster until 1999 when that “All” was reduced to it is thought at least 80%. There are many bones of contention however, not the least of which is the fact that total Westminster borrowing is serviced by per capita population proportions as decided by the Treasury. The stark conclusion is that the people of Scotland year on year are subsidising the Treasury, ie: the National Debt while not being party to either the necessity thereof or the resulting costs. The Treasury holds and jealously guards the key to the national treasure chest .
Our people are almost daily accused of being totally dependent upon the largesse of England and Westminster’s generosity. Common sense will judge that if the London financial wizards are correct and we really are permanently in need of rescue, what has Westminster been doing for the last 314 years? The abject failure is surely theirs!
The economic situation of Scotland published ,analysed, annotated and referenced exhaustively in “Scotland the Brief” has at no time been refuted by Westminster and the claim is perfectly valid that our independent country, rich in natural resources and ambition, is capable of earning our people a successful, happy future.
Recent financial incursions by Westminster, transfers of English personnel and “threats” of a continuance of the tactics, are contrary to the Scotland Acts.
The ills of Scotland will end with its freedom, when will begin the tough but enjoyable work of correcting 314 years of, being charitable, neglect and unsympathetic behaviour of Westminster, and can consign them to history.
John Hamilton
Bearsden
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel