on May 7th, 2008The Fire of Scottish Nationalism
Telegraph article Now faced with the real possibility of going down in history as the myopic political movement that destroyed Britain from within, Labour in Scotland are running scared
concerning the Labour parties problems in Scotland, we all know that they
messed up the devolution process and by turning a deaf ear to the visionists, even those in their own party like Tam Dalyell, have incorporate imbalance in the British constitutional settlement.
The problem is by creating a separate Scottish parliament they have also fed the beast of Scottish nationalism, that devolution was supposed to slay. That is if we are to believe the devolution process was intended to slay the beast of nationalism in the first place, and was not simply evidence of NewLabour blindly following the EU regional policies.
Now that Labour has created the Scottish parliament they find that this is considered by the nationalists, as nothing more than a simple stepping stone in the direction of full independence. Labour has belatedly discovered the water they thought they were pouring on the smouldering embers of Scottish nationalism has turned out to be petrol instead. What was a relatively small and relatively unimportant movement has been given new life, a new impetus, a stronger and more strident voice and on top of that, a vehicle in which to promote the cause of independence in the separate parliament.
Now apparently it has finally dawned on Labour that without Scotland they have a very slim chance of ever again gaining power in the rest of Britain, they have by their own actions undermined their own power base. It is worrying that the leaders of this country have such a short attention span that they could not have foreseen this outcome, or were they so overcome by their own successes and a determination to change the face of politics and power in Britain for ever, that they believed in their own immortality at the ballot box and thought they could control the situation by always holding power in Scotland.
Even so the question should be asked; what then of other decisions they have forced through on the back of their overwhelming power in Westminster, the Lisbon Treaty perhaps? If they could not understand the problems they were creating for themselves and the country by their short-sightedness, even when those problems were forecast, then what hope is there that they can understand the relevance of conflicting clauses in the EU constitution that will only become evident when the ECJ has ruled.
Now faced with the real possibility of going down in history as the myopic political movement that destroyed Britain from within, Labour in Scotland are running scared and have done a massive U turn. From a position of opposing a referendum they are now calling for an earlier referendum date. The fear is that the SNP timetable for a referendum for full independence, which is later in 2010, would allow Alex Salmond the time to change the balance of opinion in favour of independence, and of course as it is ever more likely that the next administration in Westminster will be Conservative which is an outcome that will also favour the SNP.
That is the basic story, but the argument that grabbed my attention was not in the main article which is only a re-hash of news already in the public domain, but in the comments section.
When we, or rather our leaders connived to create our nation by fusing Scotland, England and Wales, into one single national entity, a process that took well over a hundred years and even then was not fully accepted by many. They dissolved both the Scottish and the English parliaments and their individual powers, and created an entirely new nation of the United Kingdoms of Great Britain. Whether our forefathers liked it or not we became one people who resided in one nation state. 300 year later and we have a totally integrated system of government we all share in the benefits and we all share in the problems and we have faced the challenges of the centuries together side by side as one people and have forged a constitution together, all of us in our different ways bringing something to the table of our nation.
That is my own, probably rose spectacled, view of our nation, one with which I am sure that a SN would wish to argue, perhaps quoting imagined deprivations and slights wrought by the English on Scotland, why is the bank of England not called the Bank of Britain why is there an English Rugby Union why is there an English Ballet Company etc.
So it follows that as we are one people, with one government and have one nation state, if there is to be a basic change in the constitution of our country, then all of us should be consulted as a basic right as British citizens. Of course the Labour government in its desire to create a separate parliament for Scotland, did not think it necessary to include the rest of us in this decision, perhaps because they were mostly Scots some of whom has signed the Scottish Claim of Rights, or perhaps because the rest of us might have voted against the break up of our nation, they opted instead to only ask those British people who happened to live in Scotland.
As can be cleaned form the previous this ignoring the views of most of the country is something to which I strongly object, however the alternative view was put in the comment to the article and runs as follows:
David Lonsdale states that the English should have some sort of say in Scottish Independence. The premise is ridiculous in the extreme. The only right the English People have under the Act of Union is to Vote to withdraw from it. His proposal suffers from a couple errors. Firstly the Union was based on Two Nations in Union. Does he believe that if his wife wished a divorce, he could Vote that it couldn’t go through because he didn’t like it. He would be laughed out of court, just as any Nation would be laughed out of the United Nations or the European Commission who now govern over all.
It is time for common sense to shine through. A vote for Scottish Independence could result in the scrapping of the United Kingdom, but turn into the more credible United Kingdoms of Independent Nations who joined an Agreement on Cooperation in outside matters like the EU etc.
As I have said, this is the time for Common Sense to Shine through. There is little or No Doubt that each Country will be the better for a United Kingdoms Agreement.
Posted by Mike on May 7, 2008 7:19 AM
The problem I see with Mikes argument is he accepts that the decision of the Scottish voters will effectively destroy the United Kingdom, and instead create something he calls a United Kingdoms of Independent Nations, but does not see by his own argument that the rest of us should also have a voice, as it is very much affecting us and our nation.
Other than that a separate English Parliament is not according to our leaders a possibility, because it would unbalance the United Kingdom so England is destined to be broken up into little pieces. This is nothing but double think; firstly the Scots are to be the only ones who have a voice in the break up of our nation and secondly we are even denied a voice within England as English, but offered a lesser sub national voice to be expressed in a contrived series of regional governments.
Technorati Tags:
Scottish Referendum, Scottish Parliment, English Regions, English Parliment,
