Siol nan Gaidheal forum

Whilst this forum is moderated, opinions expressed are those of the person posting, and are not necessarily those of the organisation.
It is currently Thu May 19, 2022 6:39 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The Calman Commission
PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:48 am 

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 2:08 pm
Posts: 126
Some more relevant musings from Traquair in the Heral Comments section - this time on the Calman Commission:

The British Colonial Trading Company (aka The Calman Commission) has started to establish some experts to advise on how best to negotiate with the natives. Here is some background on one of these advisors :

Iain McLean,
He has published a paper on the Barnett formula.
A summary of some of the reporting on it is:
"Axe Barnett formula – it's unfair to English"
"The process which decides the level of cash Scotland gets from the Treasury is perverse"
"Barnett is unsustainable in the long-run. It is neither efficient nor equitable"
A reason given for Scotland's "extra" funding is "Scotland pose credible threats to the Union of the United Kingdom."

Other musings from Mr MacLean are :
"If the Scottish Nationalists (SNP) came to power, they would negotiate secession, which would endanger some projects dear to Unionists of all parties – such as the UK’s seats in the UN Security Council (worrying to Conservative Unionists) and the capacity of Labour to govern the UK, which usually (although not since 1997) depends on the Labour-held seats in Scotland."

"Why then is Edinburgh getting trams and Leeds not? Because of the way the Barnett Formula works"
"The Scottish National Party administration in Edinburgh is, naturally, spending the money it gets in its generous block grant. To be fair, it was a bit reluctant about the Edinburgh trams, but not at all reluctant about free prescriptions, cheap university tuition at Scottish universities (for Scottish and EU students but not for English one) and free social care for elderly Scots.

It looks to me that Mr Mclean is much more interested in protecting UK and English interests rather than Scottish ones. And this is type of person the Unionists have installed to dictate how Scotland will be governed. It sounds like Scotland better enjoy our "free social care for elderly Scots", "free prescriptions", "cheap university",.. before our "generous" subsidy is removed. Scotland needs to escape from this insulting colonial behaviour as soon as possible.

What a surprise that The British Colonial Trading Company's first and foremost interest is the British and not the restless natives. One of the members of the British Colonial Trading Company Lord James Douglas-Hamilton has had some interesting perspectives on the devolution thing :

"He (Lincoln) not only helped to abolish slavery but also succeeded in saving the Union. Today few would disagree that the United States has been a far stronger and greater country through retaining its unity than it would have been through breaking up into smaller, hostile groupings."
So Scots after independence would become a "hostile grouping" - he should have just said hostile natives and be done with it.
"For the Unionist there must be three principles in any plan of constitutional reform. They are first, the maintenance of the Union; second, the provision of better government; third, the proposals must be acceptable to the United Kingdom as a whole."

Clearly Scotland does not come first and foremost in the priorities of Lord Douglas-Hamilton, which is perhaps why he was amongst the 10% of Scottish MPs who did not support the 1989 Claim of Right
"We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount."

It is clear where his priorities lie if it is was not abundantly clear already given he was one of the Scottish Office lackies during the Thatcher era when Scotland was well and truly subservient and degraded by the British state.
"Every Scottish student of history knows that Scotland in 1707 entered into Union voluntarily"
Hmm, interesting take - I guess there were no bribes, no riots, etc .. Brit-adoon must be truly be the land of milk and honey in minds of the Unionistas.

"Scotland has less than 10 per cent. of Britain's population but because of its different legal system, we need more time than Parliament allots. If Scotland gets all the necessary parliamentary time, it will impinge upon the parliamentary time necessary for the other 90 per cent. of the population. This, in a sentence, is the case for the Scottish Assembly."

Hmm, looks like we should be glad that Scottish law is so complex or there would have been no case for devolution at all.

We Scots should follow the lead of the Boston Tea Party and tip the members of this British Colonial Trading Party into the Clyde.

Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Copyright Siol nan Gaidheal © 2003-15

Newsnet Scotland