Yes versus the SNP

First of all I would like to apologise to my readers for being off the air for a few days.  I’m back with a vengeance and more controversial than ever.

Today I have been out canvassing for the Yes Campaign in Arrochar.  We all got well and truly soaked.  However, we received a warm welcome at many doors.  Many commented that they have received nothing from Better Together and here we were at their door, drippin’ wet with a handful of soggy leaflets – but we were out there!

Our message today was to announce the public meeting at the 3 Villages hall on 28 May aimed at Undecided in the Referendum.  However, I was most interested to listen to the comments and the questions and a few No voters explained their reason for wishing to stay in the Union.  This is what got me out on such a fine Scottish morning.

I met a number of people who were undecided.  However, they volunteered that they did not like Alex Salmond nor the SNP.

I was not defensive and assured them that I was a passionate Yes campaigner, but not SNP.  I explained that I did not agree with many of the SNP policies.  However, I had a great deal of respect for Alex Salmond who got us to where we are today – and for that, many if not most Scots will be eternally grateful.

The more meetings I attend and the more canvassing I do, the more I see an awareness or even a frustration that although the YES Campaign and the SNP want the same outcome; an Independent Scotland – they are not the same.  I have found myself defending a YES vote by distancing myself from SNP policies.

I met one woman who confirmed she was a definite No.  She went on to say she would be voting UKIP on 22 May.  Suddenly, a door flew open – metaphorically.  I explained to her that my passion was Scottish Independence.  However, I am a paid up member of UKIP, I stood for UKIP in London/Ilford at the 2010 General Election, I was a fully accredited member of the Parliamentary ‘pool’ at UKIP and if that was not bad enough, I was an immigrant from Belgium.  However, instead of canvassing for UKIP in the European election I had decided to focus my time with the Yes Scotland campaign, because that is where my heart is.

Her mood changed completely as she realised she was not talking to the SNP.  We had a great chat, I got thoroughly soaked and as I squelched away she had moved from No to No but thinking about it.  That was worth a couple of soakings.

When I met up with the rest of the team I explained that I had been set upon by a bunch of BT’s who had thrown me in the Loch – they didn’t buy it – but I had them going for a moment.

Apologies to the woman who said she was a definite NO – I left her a YES window poster confirming this was Yes to the Union?  Sorry!

Let’s get serious for a few moments.  I would like to explain a couple of areas where I totally disagree with the SNP.

TRIDENT.  I am not opposed to Trident, I am opposed to using it.  I am totally opposed to weapons of mass destruction, Christ, if a see a spider in the house I see him off the premises rather than flatten him.  Consider this.  The 2nd World War raged on in the far east into 1946.  15 million Chinese perished, including many millions of civilians.  Two atomic bombs were exploded in Hiroshimo and Nagasaki killing 100s of thousands.  WW2 ended immediately.  The final death total far exceeded 60 Million.  0.003% were killed by atomic bombs – that’s 1/3 of 1%.

Ask yourself this.  How many millions of people, mainly civilians, have been killed in wars in the world since 1946.  Let’s see, Iraq = 1,00,000 and on, and on …  How many of them were killed by a nuclear device?  Let’s see – 0, that’s NONE.

So, what is the true weapon of mass destruction?  Conventional weapons.  Why is that?  Simple, the only war that will be fought is the war that can be won.

How many nuclear bombs have been used since 1946?  That’s right, None … in 68 years!

The western world has still not recovered from 9/11 – what chance is there of our economy and life as we know it, surviving, if a nuclear detonation occurs anywhere in the world.

Finally, Trident has got to be the greatest bargaining chip in the world, ever.  Some say it costs Scots a lot of money.  OK, whose weapons are they?  Clearly, the US – who just happen to be the richest country in the world by a country mile.  OK … So, we’ve just got independence, and money’s tight.  We pick up the phone to Barrack and explain we cannot afford the payments.  In fact we could use a bit of rent for keeping them.  Barrack say’s, ‘OK Scotland, we’ll drop by and pick them up’.  Some hope!  Barrack, would be on the phone to say to us, ‘how much do you need, guys?’

In any event, in a few years time, after we have squeezed quite a few billions out of the US they will declare Trident obsolete – and that will be that.

Before I leave the subject let me just say this.  If Scotland disarmed unilaterally would this have any impact on North Korea, Pakistan or Israel; as three nuclear states in a conflict/threat environment.  Also, if the US can blow up the world 20 times over, and they reduced their stockpile of weapons by 5% they could still blow up the world 19 times – once is too much?

Now let us look at the question of remain in or joining the EU.  This question has proved to be an obstacle to the Yes campaign as we argue the toss whether Scotland can remain in, gain immediate(ish) re-entry or become an Accession State waiting in the queue for our ‘turn’.

Why is this even a relevant question?  In the first instance, Scotland is currently controlled from the EU by ‘association’.  Why, for heavens sake, would we wait 300 years for Independence from Westminster control then hand that direct control over to the EU.  This is an indefensible position and a massive chink in our armour.

Without boring you with a million statistics I would summarise a few key points: The UK is a NET contributor to the EU – in other words we put more in than we get out.  The cost of membership is around £55m per day made up of entry fees, compliance costs and non-compliance penalties.  At present the EU trumps almost everything we do – for example, it is the Court of last resort if we are not satisfied with justice in the UK.

More importantly, UKIP have progressed since 1993 to the party who came second in the last EU elections ahead of Labour and Liberals and now favourite to win the EU election on 22 May 14.  This is on a mandate of withdrawal from the EU based on the total loss of control of our group of country and the absolute costs.  Whether we agree or disagree with UKIP we can’t hide from the statistics and their exponential rise in popularity.  Moreover, we can all see that UKIP are changing the shape of the current Conservative party.  I get weekly updates on the local election performance across the UK and see a massive swing to UKIP who poll 20% and higher in almost every ward.  What I am saying is there is a massive swing of opinion in the UK against the EU and there is also a growing resistance to the EU within the EU itself.

The experience and progression of UKIP should be giving Scotland a huge clue.  Scotland must regain its sovereignty, hold on to it with both hands and can do the same as Norway, for example, pay an admission fee to the EU that allows them to trade.  However, we would be free to strike trade agreements with the massive emerging economies such as Brazil, Mexico, China, India and Russia.

With a YES vote, Scotland will quickly realise that, on the world stage, we are the most eligible bachelor and the most popular girl at the party.  Coming in, relatively, eight richest country, behind the top 7 who already have all their trade agreements in place, we will be the focus of attention and we’ll get to pick the best deals.

Most importantly, because we have so much in common with our neighbours in England, Ireland and Wales and because of our Scottish nature we will be good neighbours and our neighbours will benefit from our success as an Independent Nation – we call it ‘The Common Weal’ whose influence does not stop at the border.

I don’t want to go into the pound, and sharing it, because the whole question is so stupid.  We simply continue using it – there.  So what happens.  We don’t get a say or a seat at the Bank of England.  We don’t have a say now, nor did we in 1967 when Labour PM Harold Wilson devalued the ‘pound in oor pocket’.  We can’t print Scottish notes?  disaster! and we can’t issue bonds – we can issue our own.  Who knows, we could go full on with the Bit coin or how about we adopt the ‘wee Bobbee’.  I am just amazed that they have managed to dupe us into seeing this as an issue?  Maybe they’ll do ‘stop and search’ at Carlisle in case anybody tries to sneak class A currency into Scotland.

 

 

 

  1 comment for “Yes versus the SNP

Comments are closed.