From Yes to SNP

I read with interest on a monthly basis ‘the Scots Independent’ newspaper. The beginning of this newspaper in 1926 predates the forming of the SNP in 1934 and therefore has a considerable pedigree and reputation for reporting news from around Scotland accurately from a civic nationalist standpoint.

I therefore opened the March 2016 edition expecting to read interesting articles from around the country with a strong slant towards the preparations for Scottish Parliamentary elections by the SNP.

What I did not expect was the article shown below for your reference.

Under the title ‘From Yes to SNP’ it states that Russell Robertson who currently represents the East Centre ward on Glasgow City Council, and was elected under a Labour ticket, has now joined the SNP and therefore becomes the second councillor in that ward to represent the party, the original one being Jennifer Dunn.

These are indeed facts. However the headline as is so often the case with other publications is inaccurate, and in this case is directly the opposite of the truth.

Russell Robertson was when in the Labour Party instrumental in strongly fighting for a NO vote, and not a YES vote to which the headline alludes. As with so many other Labour party figures he,according to reputable witnesses stood outside a polling station on the day of the Scottish Independence Referendum on Thursday 18^th September 2014, was heard telling pensioners that their pensions were under threat if they voted YES, telling benefits claimants that their weekly cheques would be under threat if they voted YES, along with other unionist untruths.

Russell Robertson and ex Labour colleagues campaigning for a NO vote in this and the following 2 pictures.

Whilst I welcome his conversion to the cause of Scottish Independence which the Scots Independent has been so eloquently fighting for since 1926 I do question his motives for doing so. The small matter of the elections to Scottish councils coming up in 2017 is very much in my mind, and the fact that the Labour Party are likely to do very badly. Given his previous activities which this article and its headline wipes from history  I can only wonder if he is motivated by trying to keep his job rather than an epiphany on the matter of self determination for Scotland. Time will however tell whether my doubts are proved correct and I most definitely hope they are not.

This small article has considerably undermined my confidence in the reports and articles from ‘the Scots Independent’. If this article’s headline is directly the opposite from the truth what then of the others that appear in this and future editions?

After all we are surrounded by a mainstream media, most of which is available free at the point of consumption, which pedals mainly news and current affairs from the British nation states point of view and not Scotland’s and is therefore considered by many not without good reason to be against Scottish independence and self determination.

We are therefore surrounded by propaganda of one type of another not to be faced with similar from the other side for which we choose to pay for. It is for this reason I am unlikely to renew my subscription to the Scots Independent in future years. After all if what I am reading is not the truth, to counteract the mainstream media, what is the point of this publication?

A Scottish political fable: Animal Farm seems alive and well in today's political climate, at least according to this facebook reviewer whose name I have not used as I have no desire to get them into even more trouble.

I am reminded as I write this of the famous book by George Orwell called ‘Animal Farm’.

Having gotten rid of their human masters the animals of Manor Farm look forward to a life of freedom and plenty. But as a clever ruthless elite amongst them takes control, the other animals find themselves hopelessly ensnared in the old ways.

Now this book may be fable but it has proved hopelessly prophetic with me recently.

I have been a member of a political party who shall remain nameless, as will the name of my branch who are the problem.  The political party itself is not the issue, although some more or indeed any assistance from central office would have been very helpful.

I strongly believe in independence for Scotland and therefore after the referendum campaign I decided to join a political party. However I wish I had never bothered as it has almost demolished all the positivity and optimism that was instilled by the Yes campaign.

  

Details and names have been changed to protect those involved for good or ill. However getting this information out in to the public domain has become increasingly important as the future of a country is at stake and the goings on I describe are undermining that very aim. If by sheer fluke someone from the branch in question of the political party in question actually see themselves in this blog post then if they are one of the wrongdoers, of which there are unfortunately plenty, perhaps they will see the light and change their behaviour. It has become impossible to change it from within so it seems it must come from outside. So here goes...

In Yes referendum campaign in our rural area we cooperated as a team where none of us were in particular charge. We had a large rural area to cover - therefore had better and more important things to do than squabble and try to get one up on each other. We were volunteering and doing so selflessly. We wanted to bring people in, not exclude them, as the more people we had the more we could achieve, as we believed the more democratic involvement the better. We were fighting to bring Government closer to the people. True, we ultimately may have had an improvement in our circumstances through the achievement of Scottish independence. But it was never about the people involved or their promotion and was never personal, and importantly was not seen as a career move. It was about a belief that things could get better and we were going to do everything possible to achieve that aim.

I have been involved in party politics before in another party but had ultimately left as I found it difficult to promote a number of policies with which I disagreed whilst still agreeing with the general stated aims of the organisation in question. In branch members comments and suggestions were respected and reasonable discussions ensued. I can never recall a raised voice. So I returned to party politics with a little hesitation as the problems with particular policies still persist but I did not expect what I got.

Initially my branch appeared to continue the high standards exhibited during the Yes campaign but very quickly by late 2014 the first signs of jostling for positions reared their head. Who was going to stand for Westminster? Who was going to be on the branch committee? Who was going to stand for Holyrood? Then the blatant self promoters reared their heads and very quickly multiplied as they saw that they might get power and influence. Then the people who were not elected to the positions they wanted started sniping at those who had been elected and the whole thing just deteriorated.

We have had new members leaving in disgust after only a few meetings.Rather than getting welcomed some were mentioned by the sniping committee members and felt extremely uncomfortable and therefore understandably didn’t want to be a part of this. At least up here there were other members to care for these people, understand their upset, and commiserate even if they could not directly help. If this goes on in other places then I hope there will be similar caring people around.

One person in my branch takes the biscuit for sniping as he has made it almost an art form. We shall call him Fred (no disrespect to any real Freds out there). How I thought this Fred was ever on the same planet as me I don’t know. I wish he wasn’t on mine.  Fred was on the committee but resigned in a strop over something and nothing (the exact details of why or what are a mystery are are unimportant). Obviously deciding he had made a mistake (he has form for resigning in a strop having done so several times already) each meeting Fred now makes a point of sitting amongst his clique and snipes at everything the person who got his previous position is doing and a few other people besides (basically anybody he doesn’t like). People like Fred are the gift that keeps giving for those whom politics is an anathema. He makes our branch an anathema. I cannot believe I respected this person at one stage. Many times the things being queried are actually because the new person in the position is unaware of what to do. However of course Fred relished this opportunity for promoting how good he was and how rubbish the new person was. It is all sickening and his behaviour is appalling but is symptomatic of the way the branch conducts itself.

So we move on to a typical branch meeting.

I went along and what I witnessed will live long in my memory unfortunately. It was a particularly lousy evening for the time of year which unfortunately translated to what was about to pass. Once again Fred and his clique were going to disrupt yet another meeting and they had quite clearly planned what was to happen in advance. The storm clouds gathered in the hall. This was to be a vulgar/desperate attempt to oust a member of the committee who we shall call Seamus. Fred argued that Seamus should apologise for a facebook thread which he said was very critical of the convenor, although the convenor was not mentioned by name. The fellow conniver, who we shall call Arthur, continued to verbally attack Seamus and received a warning from the chair to calm down. The chair asked if a complaint had already been submitted to HQ to which Fred agreed and said he had sent a complaint to HQ already. Fred then walked to the chair to hand over a brown envelope. The chair put his hand out to collect it but Fred instead threw the envelope onto another committee member’s desk! It was a letter containing a proposal for a special meeting to discuss the facebook thread in question with a view to deselecting Seamus. The discussion moved from the floor to office bearers and one person from the floor said the chair had to take control of the meeting. It was agreed that the facebook thread would be read out in its entirety – forget foodbanks, destitution, welfare cuts – this was what mattered to this branch more than anything as it involved them and their positions as opposed to folk who actually need assistance and desperately so. One minor committee member (in a relationship with another one in pivotal position) tried desperately to argue that the facebook thread was mysogynist! This view didn’t wash with the membership and real anger started to develop. The minor committee member and another committee member were very angry and animated and mumbled various comments. Arthur was again becoming very agitated and received another warning to calm down. At this stage the microphone was being passed around by those against Seamus. Eventually Seamus (who had his hand up for a long time and understandably wished to speak) received the microphone and under the circumstances skilfully kept his cool whilst under serious pressure. He acknowledged what had been said but challenged his accusers and stood his ground in a civil way. At this point Arthur was off his seat and his face bright red with fury whilst being very animated and pointing his fingers. He was standing only a few yards from the treasurer, who had indicated felt intimidated at a previous branch meeting, although she did throw a few angry mumbles out herself exactly the opposite to what she was arguing in the last meeting. At this point the Chair gave Arthur a third and final warning that if he did not calm down he would have to leave the building!The minutes of this meeting do not illustrate the Arthur episode, as after argument at a subsequent meeting they were voted through even although they were incomplete or wrong. Seamus being vilified was unsurprisingly fully included.

Seamus by any measure was subjected to a bitter vile bullying/abusive and intimidation ordeal backed up by some office bearers who have themselves lost the plot! This was ugly and vulgar to observe and if it was to occur in a public place would probably have resulted in a law suit or prosecution for intimidation. Seamus was persecuted that evening and humiliated by both branch members and members of the executive and regardless of what the facebook page was about this was totally unacceptable! 

With regards to the subject of facebook messages, I can say quite easily that the thread read out was nothing in comparison to what I have read, many from whom were doing the accussing on that particular evening. The very fact that members of the branch are lurking around looking for negatives is quite disgraceful and would shame any organisation least of all one which is voluntary by its nature and is meant to be force for good.

And then we come to our most recent branch meeting and my last. A reasonable proposal was put forward to discuss politics in our meetings. Never at any stage is there a platform for discussing real issues like poverty, redistribution of wealth, independence or indeed anything else worthwhile discussing. Given that this is actually the reason that we are all meant to be there you would have thought that this plan would be given immense support. It would also be an infinitely more positive thing to spend time on, rather than constant tiny internal branch matters, and Fred’s continual sniping. Well the democratic answer was a big fat NO. Presumably due to the fact that the person who proposed this reasonable measure is not a member of the ruling elite of the branch, it was voted down. Plus it was also dressed up to be something entirely different in the agenda i.e. additional time at these meetings which have become so burdensome given their content. So it has been officially decided that in a political party branch, politics is not actually to be discussed. Or at least until one of the in crowd suggest it perhaps?

In order to sort out the contention regarding the minutes another reasonable proposal was put forward to make an audio recording of the proceedings. This too was voted down, as to quote Arthur 'he wants to be able to say things in the meetings which he does not necessarily want recorded'. Tell us something we don't know Arthur. Never a truer word?You would never have gotten away with what you did in conjunction with Fred and co if things had been recorded.

Self promotion is all very well if it is for the good of the organisation and you need to have some degree of this to stand for election. However when that detracts from the operation of the organisation, is in direct conflict with it as has quite clearly been the case on a few occasions, or there are witch hunts against certain people who are perfectly able, but just not liked by certain people all ready in positions of power, then your organisation is ultimately doomed. Gone is inclusion. Now my branches actions show they consider it good to exclude and make a misery of those that don’t agree that you should be allowed to promote yourself or your clique, or indeed if you say anything out of line at all.

The pomposity, stupidity and arrogance of the ruling elite in our branch are achieving what they want which is what makes it so sad. They will indeed get all the positions as there will be nobody else left. The people who attended branch meetings, who were the selfless activists are drifting away demoralised and humiliated. The people who are being lost are those who were not in it for selfish means – they actually still believe in the original aim and still want to achieve it.

I am reminded how ‘Animal Farm’ ends.

“Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”

I want Scottish independence for the same reasons I did before. Our distance from Westminster means we are ignored except if there is something of advantage to be gained by those in power in London by making a pretence of listening. Now however the fact that the politicians that the people elect will be within closer kicking distance is something which I consider high on the list of priorities, particularly if the people elected are of the stature of those self promoters and sniping miseries in my own branch (whose members have been compared to a nest of vipers more than once) of which I am ashamed to say I remain tentatively but most definitely not an active member. However I shall continue to chunter away with blogging and facebook in the hope that independence will come around one day. 

I want these meanderings to be a reminder to the people now active in politics in Scotland and in other countries around the world. Don't forget who you are meant to be serving. Now let me get back outside in the farmyard where I belong.

Written by a disgruntled political party member in rural Scotland who wishes to remain anonymous.

The story continues...
 http://thefreescott.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/a-scottish-political-fable-continues.html

Unite to fight for Scottish Independence

I do wish the Yes movement would stop bickering over what the best tactical pro-indy vote would have been in a system in which tactical voting is practically impossible. I have heard many folk in the pro-independence movement becoming really annoyed and disheartened by blaming people for voting a particular way or other. It is over and we could talk ad-infinitum over the SNP's #bothVotesSNP being a good idea or not, or some people splitting their vote between the Greens and the SNP.

The ballots have been cast in the Scottish Parliamentary elections for another 5 years, the polling stations long closed and the results are in, squabbling over could haves and should haves can serve no purpose than divide a movement that must be united if we are to move our cause forward.

There is majority for independence in parliament it is our task now to ensure there is a clear and consistent public support for independence. 

There is also the advantage to having the Tories as the main opposition. Nicola Sturgeon as newly elected First Minister can now put Ruth Davidson on the rack over what the Conservatives are doing in London and how this is adversely affecting Scotland and its people. Thinking about it this should be very easy!

Also should this dynamic persist as looks very likely, when the Scottish Independence Referendum comes around it should be much easier to argue that the only way to a more socially just Scotland lies in the path to independence. Do you want A Tory Government for Westminster to decide on what is best for Scotland or do you want Scotland to decide what happens? I know which one I want. 

In 1999 Scotland handed over 6000 square miles of North Sea to Westminster

In 1999 Scotland handed over 6000 square miles of North Sea to Westminster

On 23.03.1999 Scotland handed over jurisdiction of 6,000 square miles of the North Sea to Westminster. The remarkable thing about this transaction is the fact that it occurred without the knowledge or consent of the people of Scotland. In fact it was a Labour government led by Tony Blair that ordered this bizarre act of treachery towards the people of Scotland and it was a senior Scottish Labour politician, Henry McLeish that sanctioned it. Yes that is the same one that is still in the Labour Party in Scotland now.

What is even worse is the fact that the whole affair was conducted in secret at committee level denying the House of Commons or the Scottish Parliament an opportunity to properly debate the issue. To their eternal shame Tam Dalyell (Labour) an arch unionist if there ever was one, John McAllion (Scottish Labour) and Sir Robert Smith (Scottish Liberal Democrats) sat on this committee and allowed this act of treason to be carried out without authority from the Scottish electorate or the Scottish Parliament.

There has never been another more serious act of treason since a handful of nobles and lords signed the Act of Union in 1707 without the expressed permission of the people of Scotland. Back then the people were aware and were outraged causing the authorities to declare martial law in Scotland for fear of violent revolt. In 1999 this act of treachery was conducted in secret no doubt to avoid such public scrutiny and outrage. Some people north of the border may not be too alarmed at this revelation and may not appreciate the significance of such a move. The logic of transferring 6,000 square miles of North Sea from Scottish jurisdiction to Westminster jurisdiction makes perfect sense if you are a Unionist government in Westminster. More so if those 6,000 square miles of North Sea happens to contain most of the Oil and Gas fields and over 80% of the traditional fishing waters of the Scottish fishing fleets. Then there is the huge potential of off shore wind farms and the revenue that will come from them when the UK begins to look at more sustainable forms of power supply (if indeed it ever does). The revenue from all those resources will no doubt head to the treasury in Westminster denying any independent Scottish government such lucrative income and counting through any future independence referendum discussion as English not Scottish. I don't think so! If this transfer of jurisdiction was carried out without the knowledge or consent of the Scottish people or the Scottish Parliament then it can only be considered at best of dubious legality and definitely immoral. The case must be made that without the authority of the democratically elected Scottish Parlimaint the transaction had no validity in law. Therefore the boundaries that existed prior to the 23rd of March 1999 will still be in force and as such all the waters within that boundary are still under the lawful jurisdiction of the Scottish Nation.

Because Scotland had its own legal system those waters in question were subject to Scottish law as were the fishing fleets that sailed them. That is no longer the case as all those fleets that have sailed in that area of the North Sea since 1999 are now subject to English law. The sheer scale of this treachery and betrayal is difficult to comprehend. To try and understand the effect on the sovereignty of Scotland is more apparent. Just imagine standing on the beach at St Andrews looking out to sea and then realise that you are now looking out on English water. In actual fact the boundary was moved from Berwick upon Tweed sixty miles north to Carnoustie. If you happen to sail up the river Tay towards the open sea you will be sailing towards English waters. By the same token if you are sailing past the port of Leith towards the open sea you will also be sailing towards English waters. Maybe the Scottish Labour and Liberal politicians who participated in this conspiracy genuinely believed they were acting in the best interests of the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, history will show that their dispicable treachery was certainly not in the best interests of the people of Scotland who they were elected to represent.

Their deceit and betrayal is not the worst of the matter because it is impossible to believe that they acted without the knowledge of the hierarchy in their own political party. If the leading politicians within the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Liberal Party were aware of this treachery then they are just as guilty of treason as those who participated in it. What this theft of Scottish waters and resources has shown is that Scottish Labour and Scottish Liberals are just as untrustworthy as the Conservatives and Westminster when it comes to protecting and representing Scotland and its interests. What makes their betrayal all the more painful is the fact that the Westminster Labour government was presided over by two alleged prominent Scots Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. For decades the people of Scotland have kept faith with the Labour Party and kept faith with the United Kingdom. That loyalty has been repayed with treachery and deceit and now seems likely to further compound the difficulties now facing Scottish Unionist parties. It will also impact on the relationship between the Scottish Parliament and its electorate with the rest of the United Kingdom. In particular it will affect the trust between the Scottish people and a Westminster Parliament that has acted with arrogance and utter disrespect for our sovereignty. 

The Liberals have shown yet again that they are definitely not to be trusted whether in a Lib/Lab coalition government in Holyrood or a Con/Dem coalition government in Westminster. We have witnessed since the last general election how quick they were to ditch many of their manifesto pledges in order to boast they were in government even if that was as a subordinate minor partner. It is only now that we are beginning to realise just how low the Liberal Democrats are prepared to get in order to achieve status as King Makers. Sir Robert Smith’s part in handing over control of this vital resource must have been sanctioned by senior members of the Scottish and United Kingdom Liberal Democrat Party just as the same must be true of the Labour members on that committee. What they did on that dark day on the 23rd of March 1999 was to act without authority from the very people who elected them and in defiance of any democratic process. It is my dearest wish that our own democratically elected government will strive to overturn this act of treason and that those Scottish politicians who participated in that act of treachery are held to account. With regard to Westminster and the future of Scotland within the United Kingdom I believe that particular Parliament has given a clear indication that it cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of the people of Scotland. The Unionist Parties in Scotland suffered a major blow in the recent Scottish Parliamentary Elections. When the people of Scotland realise the full extent of this treachery and treason it is possible the next blow could be fatal. It is now apparent that the people of Scotland cannot trust any of the Unionist parties to act in the best interests of the Scots or the nation of Scotland in all its entirety.

In a recent post entitled ‘My head says Yes but my heart largely says NO’ I was undecided. That post was written just a few weeks ago and at the time I genuinely believed that to be the case. It was also before I discovered that the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Liberal Party had conspired to remove 6,000 square miles of North Sea from Scottish jurisdiction without informing the people of Scotland first or seeking our permission. I am now convinced that the argument for independence has been made. Not by the Nationalists who are prepared to accept the will of the people and delay a referendum but by the deceit and contempt displayed by all the Unionist parties towards the people of Scotland. The changing of the North Sea boundaries by Westminster without our consent is not the first time that Unionist parties have disregarded our rights and our sovereignty. However, it is by far the most serious act of betrayal since the signing of the Treaty of the Union back in 1707. For the sake of our children and our grandchildren we must make sure it is the last time. I am no longer undecided about independence for Scotland and believe it will and must happen before those liars and thieves take even more.

Before the Scottish #indyref in September 2014. My head said YES but my heart largely said NO.

I am very impressed by the standard of debate on the subject of the Scottish independence referendum amongst the ordinary people of Glasgow and around Scotland. That is the whole point of this exercise i.e. to involve the people of Scotland in the running of their own country and where they want it to go in the future.

It is very clear of the significant amount of information is mentioned for a positive Yes vote, but there seems to be no positive vision of a No vote as there are no valid reasons are mentioned above.

If I was taking this debate alone I would vote YES because I believe that there is a far greater deal of certainty with a NO vote i.e. that things will get worse as they have been doing in the UK for the last goodness knows how many years.

To take one example from yesterday the privatisation of the Royal Mail which all the polls show the public do not want and would not be happening in Scotland if the Scottish Govt actually had control over it.

To mention something from above about workers rights being compromised in an independent Scotland, has this not all ready happened and is continuing to happen in the UK (or have I been living on another planet for the last 30 years?).

At least with a YES vote Scotland might actually get the Government it actually votes for that has control over all its own affairs. To take two recent examples...

1. Of Scotlands own MPs 11 voted for the cuts in benefits whilst 46 voted against. It is being imposed nonetheless.

2. Of Scotlands own MPs that you voted for, 4 voted for the bedroom tax, 41 against. It is being imposed nonetheless.

Interestingly 52% of small to medium sized businesses polled were in favour of independence too.

I don't want the certainty of being on a slowly sinking ship no matter what Scotland votes for. I want to be on a ship (or an independent Scotland) when we might actually have a chance of influencing the steering unlike the status quo. Although the Scottish Parliament has helped in some ways it has also emphasized what powers it does not have.

For example would the Scottish Government position a nuclear deterent, if it decided to have one, around 30 miles from the country’s largest city? I think not.

I continue to look forward to receiving a positive reason to vote NO. My heart largely says NO as it still wants to believe in a vision of all the peoples of the UK working together for a better future, but that is not based on fact or the experience of the last 30 years, and also my study of history before that.

My head says YES. All the facts, figures, evidence, etc. point that way.

I will however decide for sure nearer the time although I definitely know which way I’m leaning.