The dug you can trust

“In the end it all boils down to trust. The No campaign wants us to surrender our trust and place it in the hands of politicians who are not answerable to us, not accountable to us, and who think they have the right to lie to us. The Yes campaign wants us to trust in ourselves, in our potential, in our talents, resources and skills.”

Wee Ginger Dug

It’s another great debate next Monday, the totes unbiased and completely neutral Beeb version whoo-hoo. But we can all save ourselves the bother – Alistair is going to bang on about the currency and how there’s no plan B but if there was it would be utter rubbish as well, as would plans C through to Z. No doubt while doing the pointy finger thing. And the UK media will write it all up as another glorious victory for the logical clearmindedness of Brittania over the woolly thinking of sheepish separatists. And they’ll be doing the pointy finger thing too, only in print.

The only other place you see pointy fingers with such regularity is in religious fundamentalist propaganda videos, or if you’re 15 just after your dad has discovered some cans of beer have gone missing from the fridge. I just thought that should be pointed out. In Alistair’s…

View original post 984 more words

Advertisements

About Hugh Wallace

Soldier, sailor, policeman, engineer, scientist, democrat, socialist, environmentalist, advocate of Scottish Independence
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to The dug you can trust

  1. Stuart Clark says:

    “In the end it all boils down to trust. The No campaign wants us to surrender our trust and place it in the hands of politicians who are not answerable to us, not accountable to us, and who think they have the right to lie to us. The Yes campaign wants us to trust in ourselves, in our potential, in our talents, resources and skills.”

    Will we all be changing jobs on the 19th of September of something ? post a yes vote ?

    In what way are politicians not answerable to you ? they are elected (Govt , Holyrood , council and Euros )every 5 years or so

    If they do something you disapprove off , then don’t vote for them , vote for someone else , if sufficient numbers are similarly aggrieved , then a another party will come to power

    What other methods are there ? i may disagree with my local councils recycling polices , I don’t actually get to walk into Fife council buildings and interrupt a meeting ,. I just register a complaint or sign a petition like everyone else

    In what way will this change in iScotland ?

    or will our current crop of disarmed politicians , soon turn into power hungry ones , as they wield real power for the first time ?

    they all get corrupted in the end .

    Like

    • Hugh Wallace says:

      Stuart, it is a shame you are so down on the ability of Scots to govern their own affairs. What makes you think we are singularly incapable of this feat?

      I have NEVER voted for any of the parties which have made up the governments in Westminster these past 20 years and the parties that I have voted for have not reached government in Westminster. I have however voted four times for my choice of party to govern in the Scottish Parliament and twice that party has formed a government but even when they didn’t they were able to form an effective opposition. Similarly the parties that I have voted for in Glasgow and Aberdeen City Council elections have either got into power or not but my voice has been heard in Scotland. My voice, and the voices of the majority of Scots, is not heard in the parliamentary corridors of Westminster. When you count the number of elected and non-elected politicians in the two Houses of Westminster you have to realise that only 4.1% of those people were voted in there by the Scottish people. 100% of the Scottish Parliament and 100% of all Scottish local authorities were voted in by the Scottish people, for better or worse, and we can vote them out again. We cannot vote out the 95.9% of Westminster politicians who directly effect our lives yet are accountable to people living far away and with different concerns than you or I.

      I am sure future Scottish politicians will be less than stellar in reputation or ability but they will, at least, be accountable to the Scottish electorate. But your tacit suggestion that the current UK politicians are corrupt already really is no argument against voting Yes in the referendum and getting shot of them. We could hardly do worse than wiping the slate clean and starting again. Could we?

      Like

      • Stuart Clark says:

        “Power coirrupts ” Hugh , and you,ll soon be find that you have swapped one ruling class for another .

        I am not down on the ability of Scots to govern their affairs , they are doing all they need to , at the moment .

        I am British my country is Britain , and I dont want Britain broken up , for some vague gains , which seem to predicate on renewable energy , and “food banks ” .

        The House of Lords can only delay laws passed by the Commons , its a brake on legislation , passing too quickly inot LAw , it must be thoroughly debated first , by the House of Commons , and then by the House of Lords

        its the way we run democracy in the UK ,

        So if Scotland gets 4..1% reperesentaion viz its popn , then that will be roughly the same throughout the whole country , every one in the UK , is treated exactly the same .

        its not as if this 4.1% , or the 59 Scots MPS , or the 2.4 million Scots who vote (approx 65% of popn , similar to the % who votes in the whole UK )

        Well We Scots do not vote as one , we vote for the parties on offer , where all tastes are catered for .

        Its unfortunate that the vagaries of the first past the post system , gives the 40% of Scot who vote Labour , 66% of our MPS , , but again it evens out over the whole UK , so that most of the electorate in Scotland , can get a chance of their party gettinga turn of power sometime

        I dont understand why the SNP hark on so much about the House of Lords ?
        is it cheap to run the Scottish Aprliament with its 130 MSPs , god knows how many admin and researchers , and all the associated expenses to boot ?

        Like

      • Hugh Wallace says:

        You see yourself as British rather than Scottish and want Scotland to remain part of the UK.

        I see myself as Scottish rather than British and don’t want Scotland to remain part of the UK.

        That really sums up the argument between you and me. Any other points about the nature of Scottish or UK democracy really is just smoke and mirrors where you are concerned so I won’t bother addressing them.

        Cheers.

        Like

      • Stuart Clark says:

        Thats all this debate is about Hugh , Scotland vs Britain

        I am surprised the other factors play such a part , its all the economy , and the EU , for me you either want to do something or you dont .

        I am Scottish born and bred , all my family going back for centurues , after leaving Scotland when I was 17 and working abroad until I was 35 , I returned to Fife and have lived here ever since

        I think perhaps the fact I was away during the Miners strike , and the poll tax , and all the Great Industrial reforms of MAggies era , perhaps left me unscathed .

        As i cant understand why the “poll tax ” is so oft trundled out .

        I would not have any interest in politics at all , if it wasnt for this referendum .

        To me Politics is just changing the colour of the wheelie bins , they are always doing something or other .

        II was blithely unaware that a referendum was on the agenda in 2011 , and when it was announced in Jan 2012 , I remember being so shocked , I was sleepless !

        Since then I have been educating myself about the issues , and studying all the arguments .

        Thats been one of the good things that ahs come out of this , that Scots and British , can deliberate , and ask themselves about their identity

        Its only in the last few months , that I have ever contemplated choosing between Scottish and British .

        Like

      • Hugh Wallace says:

        I can respect your position of being both Scottish and British and not wanting that to change. That is a choice open to all of us to take if we wish. My position has always been that I can accept and respect the position of anyone who simply says ‘I want to remain within the UK because I am British’ but it is when they start saying ‘…because we are Better Together’ that I object. To make that claim their has to be evidence to support to say a) we Scots are well off within the Union now and b) we Scots will be better off in the Union in the future.

        I’ve never not been politically aware and I can remember the question of Scottish and British identity being discussed in my home from a very early age but I am not a party-political person in the sense of owing my allegiance to one group over all others. Yes, I’ve always voted SNP to this date but they are simply a means to an end and I will most likely vote for the Greens post-independence but I am not, and never have been, a member of any political party and suspect that will probably remain the case throughout my life. But I have long understood that the colour of you wheely-bin is the least of what politics has to offer; real politics is about education, health, wealth distribution and going to war (among other things). I too left Scotland at a young age (8) so missed most of Maggie’s reign and I could very easily be in the camp of ‘I’m all right so the country must be all right’ except that I never lost touch with poorer relations who I saw (and see) the UK system failing. For me, leaving the UK and returning to it a few years later (aged 16) brought into stark relief what it meant to be Scottish and British.

        My previous work had me travelling to various parts of the world and I have seen both poverty and wealth so I know that Scotland and the UK is not a complete basket case but I have also seen that we fall way short of what our near neighbours in Europe are managing to deliver to their peoples. If they can do it, why can’t we? Are their politicians somehow less corruptible than ours? Or are they pretty much the same but the system they operate in delivers better results? That’s all I want for Scotland, the chance to be more like the Danes, the Swedes, the Finns, the Norwegians, the Swiss, the Dutch or the Irish. Countries with their own problems but able to apply their own solutions. The UK wants us to be like the Americans and I don’t want that for a variety of reasons.

        I too think that one of the best things that this referendum has brought about is people in Scotland waking up politically and actually thinking about the issues for a change. Not everyone has awoken of course and there are plenty who are sleep-walking into making a choice, Yes or No, but more people are awake and aware. That is one reason why I have high hopes for an independent Scotland because if the people hold their politicians accountable then they can affect change. If they go back to sleep – post Yes or No – then you are right about swapping one set of rulers for another without changing the system in any way. Hell mend us then. But that still won’t be any worse than remaining within the current political framework which comes with guarantees of further austerity and military spending.

        With respect to your self-education regarding politics, can I ask if you have read the http://wingsoverscotland.com/weebluebook/? If not, I politely ask that you do. If so, please ask yourself what evidence you have to counter its claims. Evidence, not beliefs. “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”

        Like

      • Stuart Clark says:

        That’s a fair point you have HUGH , re “Better Together ”

        it s the name of the campaign to keep Scotland in the Union , it could have been called
        “NO ” I suppose , just hard to put a positive spin on that word . 😉

        Its possible to pick holes in anything , to keep a firm moral compass is harder , nigh impossible really .

        You can arrive at a makeshift arrangement , a compromise a consensus , and that is what we have in the UK , a country full of greedy capitalists , keen to exploit every opportunity , yet tempered by a sense of social justice , a belief in law , and respect for democracy .

        Yes IScotland can look like this too .

        For me when the Union was formed , Scotland soon adapted to her warlike ,ambitious neighbour , and together under the Union Jack , had a whale of a time building an empire ,which brought glories and riches , (for the most part , the wealth we still enjoy today in the UK , is a large residue from what we “plundered “during the Empire ,

        (the Rail network , the roads , all the expensive jobs were all done then )

        Well the Germans challenged our pax Britannica , and twice they took us to the wire (along with the allies off course )

        And we never quite recovered from these fight to the deaths , yet we held firm …….,just .

        Its that History that I hark back to , and whatever troubles we face as a country in the UK , the de cling, economy , and our role in the world , the rise of Asia , our reliance on service industries and finance , the declining living standards , the expense of maintaining social welfare provision ,

        There are all as nothing to what we have endured , and how the idea of Britain was forged .

        For me it’s not better together

        its for better or worse ,, loyal to the end .

        Like

      • Stuart Clark says:

        You can use the argument about 4.1 % amd 100% , with anything

        Its sophistry

        Scotland does not vote enmasse

        There are 4 million voters in the electorate in Scotland , and approx 63.8 % of them vote

        So approx 2.4 millions Scots turn out for General Elections
        a similar % to the turnout in General Elections throughout the UK , So if Scots suffer “apathy ” , then it is similar to the UK as whole .( 65.1 % in 2010 )

        In 2010

        1035000 =42% voted labour = 41 MP’S

        465 471 = 18.9% voted Liberal =11 MP’s

        491386 = 19.9 % voted SNP = 6 MP’s

        412 855 = 16.7% voted Tory = 1 MP

        Labour is the largest party , but its amount of MP’s are disproportionate to its share of the vote , even though approx 40% of the vote has went to labour for over 50 years

        If Scotland “always “got the Govt it voted for then Labour would be in power all the time

        Is it fair that 40% of Scots should always govern the rest ?

        Would it not be possible for other smaller parties to form an alliance and get a “turn” in Govt

        That way the Liberals and the SNP can get a turn in Govt .

        If Scotland has rejected New labour , (And NL has been around for 20 years approx )

        then why Have Scots continued to vote labour , in spite of the fact it no longer serves their needs ?

        Would the natural left inclinations of the Scots , go towards the parties offering real left wing polices ?

        It has been 20 years after all and 4 elections (1997, 2001, 2005, 2010 )

        Like

      • Hugh Wallace says:

        I’m not quite sure if you are saying a) the UK is completely OK and there is no need to change anything or b) the UK is a complete mess and it is pointless trying to change anything so we shouldn’t try.

        Simply looking at the figures you have provided (I am assuming they are correct and illustrative of Scotland over the past few decades for ease of discussion) I see several problems jumping right out at us.

        Until recently the UK government (UKG) was either Tory or Labour and, for the sake of simplicity, these parties get to rule 50% of the time. So if 42% of Scotland’s electorate routinely votes for Labour then half of the time 58% of the Scottish electorate did not choose the UKG when Labour is in power. If the Tories win then nearer 83% of the Scottish electorate didn’t vote for the UKG. How are either of these situations to be considered in any way democratic or representative of the Scottish political view?

        At the very least the figures above illustrate very clearly that a FPTP voting system is not good at reflecting the views of a population. Under a proportional representation system, simply taking the voting turnout (and ignoring those who did not vote) then Labour should have 25 MPs, LibDem 11, SNP 12 and Tories 10 (rather than 41, 11, 6 and 1) but if you take into account that 40% of those eligible to vote don’t bother (and you could see that as a rejection of the political system and all the parties involved) near enough 75% of the population DO NOT vote for Labour yet they hold 70% of Scotland’s parliamentary seats in Westminster. I think Scotland HAS rejected New Labour and the Tories yet both get to rule over us from Westminster.

        If you want the smaller parties to have a chance to rule how do you see that happening within the UK system? It seems to me that your desire only has the chance of fulfilment in an independent Scotland where small parties do have much more of a voice and could have much more of a voice in future.

        Like

      • Stuart Clark says:

        Read the WEEBOOK Hugh

        1 Scotland is a country, and like any other country it deserves to get the governments it votes for. As part of the UK, that happens well under half of the time. We don’t affect the outcome of UK elections, so the rest of the UK doesn’t need our help – so why keep subjecting ourselves to governments we rejected at the ballot box?


        have explained this in my work on voting figures and first past the post .

        Its based on 40% of Scots voting Labour , and getting Labour for the last 50 years .”

        Point 2 “Scotland is wealthier ” ,

        I am glad of that fact , Scotland is the 40% tax payer in the family of the UK , we have broad backs and pay more tax , and put in more than we take out , ” like 40% tax payers in the UK taxation system ”

        being British I am just sharing the wealth around the UK .

        Point 3

        “Scotland is wealthy”

        , ditto , well done

        Point 4

        We have nothing to fear but fear itself. Threats that “FIFE” will be ejected (even temporarily) from the EU are hollow, impossible to ever put into practice. The same applies to border controls. Nobody can stop us from using the pound. No country poses a military threat to “Fife “and the only reason terrorists might attack us is because we’re part of the UK. We’ll still get to watch the BBC.

        You can say that about anywhere (as I have done ) 😉

        point 5

        Agreed
        people are sensible

        people are sensible just now as well

        We in Scotland are already in a currency Union , we have massive renwable potential , we have a welfare state , etc

        i don’t see why dismantling one country based on national borders , and setting up another , is so urgent ?

        the wind will still blow , some people are bound to be at the bottom of the pile , others will get richer , politicians and celebrities may get corrupted by wealth and power

        and commit crimes of fraud , etc , its human nature , no nation is immune


        This is perhaps the simplest aspect of the debate to deal with. Scotland rarely – less than half the time, in fact – gets the governments it votes for. Scots have voted for Labour at every Westminster election since 1955, but by the time of the 2015 election will have had Conservative”

        Its not true , it is based on FPP anomalies ,

        40% of Scots should not get what they want all the time

        “We believe Scotland is a country, and therefore should get the governments it votes for every time”

        Britain is my country , my Scottish ness must be subordinate to that

        “Q: “But lots of people didn’t vote for the current government. People in Liverpool or Manchester didn’t vote for the Tories either, but they still got them as a government.”
        A: The unit of measurement for democracy in governmental elections is nations, not cities. No government ever gets 100% of the vote, and indeed it’s decades since any UK government even managed 50%. Some individuals or regions will always get a government they didn’t vote for. But the referendum hinges on whether you think Scotland is a country or just a region of one. It can’t be both.”

        it cna be both

        ” The unit of measurement is nations “? where is this unit of measurement ?

        “Q: “But doesn’t Scotland get more money spent on it than it generates in tax?”
        A: Sort of. In 2011-12, for example, Scotland generated roughly £57bn in tax and had £64.5bn spent on it. But that extra spending isn’t a generous gift from the UK – it’s borrowing, taken out by the UK government in Scotland’s name. It’s not money from the rest of the UK, it’s money from international banks – it becomes part of the massive debt referred to above, and Scotland has to pay it back.
        (And we have to pay it even if we didn’t need or want the things it was spent on – like nuclear weapons, the London Olympics and the HS2 railway from London to Birmingham, all of which Scotland pays billions of pounds towards because Westminster claims”

        the whole Uk runs a deficit

        approx 10% of what it spends it borrows ,

        Infrastructure projects are a good way of pumping money into the economy
        , I suppose Scotland could do with a Motorway to Aberdeen , and one from there to Inverness ,

        there are a few points I have dealt with ,

        its the whole cover up off the democratic deficit that does it for me , there has to be Tories in Scotland , what about all the self employed and small business folk ?

        It was this lunge to liken us all to Panda bears in Edinburgh zoo , that galvanised me into finding out the facts

        (the voting stats )

        Like

  2. Stuart Clark says:

    Hi Hugh

    I am naturally sketicla of all change , to me the French had the right idea

    “Plus ca change , plus la meme ” (thats for 30 years ago ) 😉

    I agree that Uk has her share of problems , so does everywhere , perosnally the problem I have with increased payments for welfare recipirnets , is it will disincentivise them to look for work

    It will stulitfy their natural self reliance , and it will increase dependency

    Not base don anything ideoligical Hugh , just base don what i see with my own eyes

    I live in an area of council houses ., as I write this I see young Scots shuffling around , not working , some are Heroin addicts , others “wannabees ” , a next door neighbour is long temr disabled , another young couple in their early 20’s dont work , but get a one bedroom flat ,and a £120 payment every week (amounts to best part of £220 per week after tax , a Job of £300 a week would pay that ? )

    they reckon they are in “poverty ” , though they both smoke , live of coke and Pizza , and when the money is gone it is gone

    I am disspaointe din their lifestyle choice , they are nice young folk though , i offerred them work doing my garden etc , (which they did ) and I gave them £20 or so

    Point is 300 meters up the Hill is a big farm , emplying 200 Bulagarins etc , all getting the minimum wage and working all summer , they come down at night to the supermarket , an dthye all seme hungry , fit an dhealthy

    and fair play to them a swell

    What kind of system keep our young folk shuffling around like domesticated sheep , , unable to walk 200 meters to a do some work ?

    i undertsand tit would “mess their benefits up ” , and “they would ge trreated like s**T by the farmer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,dont they all 😉 ”

    i just think people are better working than not

    So this whole YES camapign predicate don “the poor an dvulnerable ” and giving them another £40 a week , to skip the food banks , seems a bit vacuos to me ,

    Why not “we;ll give you al a job on a farm for the Summer , and then when ther ei no work in Spetember , get back on benefits ”

    Do you see what i mean HUGH ?

    getting back to the Democratic deficit ,

    the FPP , works as the anomalies get spread over the whole UK
    so 40% of the vote would give you roughly 40% of MPS etc

    (though in 2005 Blair won a 69 seat majority with 35% of the vote )

    So the 40% who vote labour are not soverign , they dont get to decide all the time , the other parties can form policies and reach a consensus to form a alternative GOVT

    hence

    37% of Scots voted for the Libs and Tories , and they form our coalition now

    so by adding the 405 to the 37% we arrive at 77% of Scots have had the govt they wanted for at least osme of the time in the last 17 years .

    An interesting addendum , is the maount of Scots who voted for Maggie in 1979 , 38% !

    or 912k Scots in 79 , 820k in 1983, and 720k in 2987

    suggesting a measur eof approavl for her polices , In Scotland !

    certianly its not what the old labour , “Red Clyde ” Radical SNP supporters , what you to hear .

    😉

    I

    Like

    • Stuart Clark says:

      sorry for spelling mistakes HUGH

      Hi Hugh

      I am naturally skeptical of all change , to me the French had the right idea

      “Plus ca change , plus la meme ” (that’s for 30 years ago ) 😉

      I agree that UK has her share of problems , so does everywhere , personally the problem I have with increased payments for welfare recipients , is it will disincentive them to look for work

      It will stultify their natural self reliance , and it will increase dependency

      Not base don anything ideological Hugh , just base don what i see with my own eyes

      I live in an area of council houses ., as I write this I see young Scots shuffling around , not working , some are Heroin addicts , others “wannabees ” , a next door neighbor is long term disabled , another young couple in their early 20’s don’t work , but get a one bedroom flat ,and a £120 payment every week (amounts to best part of £220 per week after tax , a Job of £300 a week would pay that ? )

      they reckon they are in “poverty ” , though they both smoke , live of coke and Pizza , and when the money is gone it is gone

      I am dissapointed in their lifestyle choice , they are nice young folk though , i offered them work doing my garden etc , (which they did ) and I gave them £20 or so

      Point is 300 meters up the Hill is a big farm , employing 200 Bulgarians etc , all getting the minimum wage and working all summer , they come down at night to the supermarket , and they all seem hungry , fit and healthy

      and fair play to them a swell

      What kind of system keep our young folk shuffling around like domesticated sheep , , unable to walk 200 meters to a do some work ?

      i understand tit would “mess their benefits up ” , and “they would get treated like s**T by the farmer ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,don’t they all 😉 ”

      i just think people are better working than not

      So this whole YES campaign predicate don “the poor and vulnerable ” and giving them another £40 a week , to skip the food banks , seems a bit vacuous to me ,

      Why not “we;ll give you al a job on a farm for the Summer , and then when there is i no work in September , get back on benefits ”

      Do you see what i mean HUGH ?

      getting back to the Democratic deficit ,

      the FPP , works as the anomalies get spread over the whole UK
      so 40% of the vote would give you roughly 40% of MP’S etc

      (though in 2005 Blair won a 69 seat majority with 35% of the vote )

      So the 40% who vote labor are not sovereign , they don’t get to decide all the time , the other parties can form policies and reach a consensus to form a alternative GOVT

      hence

      37% of Scots voted for the Libs and Tories , and they form our coalition now

      so by adding the 40% to the 37% we arrive at 77% of Scots have had the govt they wanted for at least some of the time in the last 17 years .

      An interesting addendum , is the maount of Scots who voted for Maggie in 1979 , 38% !

      or 912k Scots in 79 , 820k in 1983, and 720k in 2987

      suggesting a measure of approval for her polices , In Scotland !

      certainly its not what the old labor , “Red Clyde ” Radical SNP supporters , what you to hear .

      😉

      Like

  3. Stuart Clark says:

    Stuart, it is a shame you are so down on the ability of Scots to govern their own affairs. What makes you think we are singularly incapable of this feat?

    I have never siad that HUGH , any thing can Govern anything , Fife can be independent , Glenrothes can be a city state ,

    I always feelt he yes side alwasy tries to draw you onto this “too wee too poor ” , its the battle ground they are safest on .

    i agree that some of the arguments against Scots indy are “emotional ” , and I dont subscribe to any of the scare stories

    A great many people in the UK are emotionally attached to their country , and just as when a long term couple , argue and splt up , there is a great many ” What are you going to do when your car breaks down ? ” “whose going to put the bins out ” ,, that kind of thing 😉

    being conservative with a small c , I prefer things as they are ,
    As the Yes campaign seems full of old 1970’s ssocialists , people who the elctorate have rejected for 35 years , and why NEW Labour was invented .

    So i dont go for the elft wing emphasis of the whole thing , nor do I like that “national boundaries ” aspect

    and above all else , i feel British , part in fact due to Alex Slamond , asking me the question , and forcing me to think what actual nationality I am .

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s