A Chance To Diversify Our Economy.

There has been a heated debate over the past few weeks concerning a new report published by the IFS (Institute of Fiscal Studies). Both sides have been claiming to have the upper hand when it comes to what the report says. Overall, for me anyway, the report has not revealed a lot more new information about the economics of the independence debate. The main points I have gathered are that:

•  The GERS report clearly states that Scotland contribute more than it gets back percentage wise, yet due to the fact that the UK is in a recession Scotland get slightly more numerically from Westminster than we pay back in taxes, yet is still in a healthier financial position to the rest of the UK to the tune of £90 billion.
• Following independence, Scotland's fiscal position would be slightly better than that of the UK, due full control over economic resources resulting in higher tax revenues for the Scottish Government.
• We would inherit less debt to GDP per head compared to the rest of the UK.
• A major asset for the Scottish economy would be our oil revenues, which would provide a significant initial boost to our economy, but due to the finite nature of the resource, could be less of an asset to us  in later decades. 

On face value, the report is pretty balanced, both sides can lay claim to have valid points to shout about. Yet, as you might have expected, the same old rhetoric prevails from the unionist side, points which I have most certainly rubbished at an earlier stage. 

One of the arguments presented by the unionist side when referencing the report is that Scotland's economy would be too reliant on North Sea Oil revenues (around 20% of our GDP comes from oil revenues), and due to the volatile nature of the resource, a price fluctuation could be disastrous for the Scottish economy. And that the oil will run out at some point in the next 50 years, so it is not a wise resource to base your economy on. 

First of all concerning the point made about the over-reliance the Scottish economy would have on oil, the very notion that the oil revenues are a bad thing to base our economy on is nonsense. A quick look at how much debt we would inherit from the UK proves just how much of a valuable asset this is to Scotland. We would inherit approximately £80 billion of the UK national debt, 8.4%. We would also inherit 90% of UK oil and gas reserves, which amount to 24 billion barrels and wholesale value of £1.5 trillion.

This would mean our economic assets, just from oil, would outweigh our debt by ten times. This is a safety net every country in the world would want to have right now in this time of economic uncertainty. It is certainly better than having our economy 60% reliant on a banking sector in which the money can stop almost instantaneously, and is precisely the thing which ruined our economy in the first place.

Recent analysis has show that our economy is not as reliant on oil as the most successful nation in Europe per head at the current moment, Norway. The statistics were compiled by the Scottish Parliament's Information Center (SPICe), and they clearly show that, over the past 12 years, the Scottish economy has been 2.2 times less reliant on oil revenues than our Nordic neighbour. The Nordic economy was 30% reliant on oil revenues, whilst Scotland's is 13.6% reliant.  Having control over its own economy, Norway has managed to build up a $600 billion oil fund to ensure that the revenues gained will last far into the future from when the resource runs dry. 

Then there is the question of, what happens when the oil runs out? Well, that will not be as remotely as bad for Scotland as it first sounds. With full control over our economic resources, Scotland can use the extra capital gained from the industries which flow down to Westminster at the current moment, to diversify our economy and make it not reliant on North Sea oil.

The obvious first investment would be in our renewable energy sector. Currently Scotland has 50% of Europe's wind power, 25% tidal, and 10% wave. Any country choosing not to invest in a sector with so much potential would be daft. Independence would give Scotland the chance to re-industrialise our nation again into researching, developing, and producing renewable energy. The Scottish government are preparing to achieve 50% of Scotland's energy from renewable sources by 2015; and 100% by 2020. Recent progress has shown that to be well on track, with 40% already being met from renewable's.

To bring this to a conclusion, it can therefore be seen that the unionist claims that our economy is reliant on, or to put it how they say it 'better together', in the UK are wrong once again. With full control of our economic resources we, the people of Scotland, can reshape our country into a more profitable, equitable, equal, and greener society, that aims to direct its revenues into raising the standard of living, and the general well being of our population. Rather than spending it unnecessarily on nuclear weapons, bloated defence budgets, and illegal foreign wars. 

The Economics of Independence.

The economic impact of independence for Scotland is the largest and most heated part of the debate. Facts, figures and opinions and flung around anywhere and everywhere to the point where someone who is impartial to the debate really does not know where to start or what side to trust. Thankfully for these people I have researched the economic side of the debate in great detail since the independence campaign started gaining real traction in 2007 with the first SNP government.

What I have found most in the economic part of the debate is that it is the most rife with ignorance. People tend to look at the debate and assert almost automatically that Scotland must be completely subsidised by Westminster, and the fact that we have an annual budget from Westminster must mean that Scotland has nothing in the way of exports to support its economy. Both these claims have been found time and time again to be completely false; and something which I hope to prove in this article, as it only takes a quick look at the bare numbers to see that they add up favourably towards independence.

Let us firstly deal with the importance of the annual budget which Scotland receives from Westminster every year. Currently our budget stands at £29'266.8 million (£29 billion), this budget pays for everything in Scotland. It isn't hard to look at this budget and reach the conclusion that: "This obviously must be the only thing which the Scottish economy depends on!". A quick look at the GERS (Government Expenditure and Revenues Scotland) report in 2010 however, reveals that claim to be wrong.

We currently have 8.4% of the UK population, contribute 9.6% of UK tax revenues and receive 9.3% of Westminster spending, this right away disproves the claim that we are indeed 'subsidy junkies'. The more crafty unionists however will try to play off the fact that Scotland, although contributing more, runs a budget deficit of around £9 billion per year.(That is the nature of a worldwide recession where spending is higher than revenues) When you compare our economic standing with that of the rest of the UK however, one can see that we are in a much healthier financial state. The rest of the UK as a whole runs a deficit close to £100 billion per year; this means that Scotland's public finances are £90 billion better off than the rest of the UK.

One can then quickly turn that around by saying: "Well, even if we are in a healthier financial state than the rest of the UK, if we were independent we would have nothing else to support our economy... other than oil, which will run out anyway". Well yes, the nature of a finite resource is that they will run out eventually, that does not mean however that the revenues from it will somehow disappear the day the oil runs out. Even without the oil revenues anyway, the Scottish economy exports tens of billion more than we receive from out current budget.

The North Sea oil and gas revenues are Scotland's largest economic resource, but it is not our only one, and despite common opinion, it does not make up the majority of our economic resources. UK Oil & Gas values the North Sea reserves at £1.5 trillion. If Scotland were to go independent. We would inherit 90% geographical share of the reserves; this would account to £1.35 trillion worth of reserves.If we now take Scotland's 8.4% population share of the UK £1 trillion national debt, then it is easy to see how quickly we could pay off that debt, just using the oil revenues.

Our share of the debt would be £84 billion. If current production levels maintain after 2014, then Scotland could pay off it's national debt within a matter of at least 6 years, as per annum revenues are around £30 billion. This would then mean that a debt-free Scotland could save up our revenues to ensure that Scotland would be ready to deal with any future crises with ease. This has already been demonstrated in Norway, who, having complete control of their economic resources, was able to develop an oil pension fund worth £600 billion, and were able to bail out their banks with ease; and are currently the only country in Europe not in debt and not running a budget deficit. But it is no use however dwelling on the past economic mismanagement of Scotland at the hands of Westminster, the more relevant question is: What can this do for a future Scotland?

The creation of an oil fund would ensure that an independent Scotland would always have enough finances to fund its public services, and ensure that Scotland would never have to undertake the savage public finance cuts demonstrated by the Conservative Westminster Government of today. It would also ensure that even after the reserves run out, in 50-100 years, the revenues would benefit countless future generations. Instead of being squandered on funding the failed London banking sector, harbouring nuclear weapons 30 miles away from our largest city, and sending young men to die in pointless foreign wars. We would have a real chance to benefit our society.

Moving away now from the issue of oil in an independent Scotland, what else does Scotland have to sustain its economy? It turns out to be quite a lot. The latest Global Connections Survey published by the Scottish Government in 2010 reveals that, other than oil, Scotland does have a lot of economic resources and exports to rely upon. A quick look at the report reveals that Scotland's international exports account to £22 billion, and our exports to the rest of the UK would are £44 billion; together this puts our exports at £66 billion, more than twice our current budget. The Global Connection Survey however does not include oil reserves, as they are treated as extra-regio resources. The inclusion of oil revenues would bring our exports to over £100 billion per year. The report states that:

"The combined value of international and rest of UK exports in 2010 (excluding oil and gas) are provisionally estimated at £66.9 billion, of which £31.0 billion is attributable to service sector companies and of which £26.7 billion is attributable to manufacturing sector companies.  The increase in total exports of +£2.3 billion since 2009 is due to a rise in the manufacturing sector of +£1.7 billion and a rise of +£955 million from the mining, and quarrying & extraction of petroleum sector, despite the a very slight decline of -£150 million from the service sector."

As you can see, in recent quarters the GDP for Scotland has been rising.

 Another part of our economy that can demonstrate how Scotland is not reliant on oil to survive can be seen in our GDP. In 2011, our Gross Domestic Product stood at £124 billion. This excludes extra-regio resources. When including the extra-regio resources. The figure rises up to £154 billion. Therefore it can bee seen that Scotland is only reliant on oil for 20% of our economy.  We only see £30 billion of this back per year... does that sound like a fair deal to Scotland, when we are told we must all suffer together?

To draw this to a conclusion you can see that the Scottish economy is indeed diverse, and made up of many components and industries. We are not 'subsidy junkies', our economy is not reliant on just oil. Scotland has all of the necessary parts in place to create a progressive and successful 21st century social-democratic society. All you have to do is vote Yes.  

It's a Debate About Prosperity, Not Survival.

Hearing Unionist talk on a daily basis, there seems to be a prevalent conception that the entire independence campaign is based on the question of "How will Scotland be able to survive after independence?". This seems rather odd to me, there has been countless admissions from the unionist side that there is no doubt that Scotland would be able to at least stand on its own two feet. The most prevalent in my memory comes from David Cameron who said clearly: "Of course I am not saying Scotland could not survive on its own." If the largest and most public advocate of the benefits of the union, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, agrees that Scotland could survive, then that should be a sufficient clarification for the unionists... unfortunately it never is.

I find it a regrettable situation when the debate around Scottish independence comes back to Scotland's basic ability to survive as an independent country. Time and time again, on both sides of the debate, the claims that we are too wee, too poor, and too stupid to be an independent country have been proved to be based on nothing but total ignorance, and revealed to be a pathetic use of scaremongering.

No one in the mainstream debate surrounding Scottish independence makes the claims that we could not survive as an independent country. (even "Better Together" verifies that in their latest video) Everyone knows that Scotland is a resource rich, energy rich country which has some of the highest education levels in the world. The crux of today's debate is whether or not Scotland is more prosperous as part of the United Kingdom or not, I have much more respect for those on the unionist side who take an informed part in that debate.

I do not need to delve into the nitty-gritty details of how we will be a more prosperous country in the event of independence. - you will be able to find much evidence of that on this blog - What I do want to say however is that the Scottish people need to get away from the childish claims that we could not survive as independent country. Some of my favourite claims which I have heard along these lines are such things as:

"Sean Connery lives in America.", "When the oil runs out, all we'll have is whiskey and shortbread tins!", "How will we even be able to feed ourselves?!", "The only reason Switzerland does well is because they stole Nazi gold after WWII!", "Us Scots can't manage anything!".

While these claims are certainly full of comic value, they do raise a serious point. These are the things which people actually believe about their own country. I have often believed that in a debate the most important thing a person can do is educate those who are wrong, as if you do not, it is ignorance, not truth, that will win. And this is certainly true in the debate about surrounding Scottish independence. The most important thing we on the Yes side of the debate can do over these next two years it to educate those who still believe in these misguided, antiquated, and severely ignorant views.



Linked here, is some evidence of the sustainability of the Scottish economy:

·         http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0039/00390896.pdf

·         http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Business-Industry/Energy/Energy-sources/traditional-fuels/oilandgas

·         http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Statistics/source/renewables/et6_1.xls

·         http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-16532440

·         http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2012/04/seveneconomicstrengths15042012

·         http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/political-news/the-myths-of-independence.15629679

·         http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-economy/4235-would-an-independent-scotland-be-financially-sound

·         http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/Home/Spare-us-the-phoney-analysis-Scotland-can-hold-her-own-7601111.htm

·         http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccrone_oil_reports.html

·         http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/opinion/cartoon/george_kerevan_we_can_still_rise_and_be_a_triple_a_nation_again_1_2040202

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Economy

Believe in yourself, believe in Scotland.

Consolidating my recent musings, I have been thinking a lot about what the root cause of disbelief among Scots towards our ability to manage our country independently might be. When looking at modern day Scotland, it strikes me as odd that there is a common belief that there is no way we could possibly manage our own country. We are an established first world society, with a stable infrastructure, a world-class education system, a National health Service which is fully paid for and ran by us, a buzzing business world that is outperforming the rest of the UK in many sectors, a net production on food, (we export more than we eat) and not to forget a country rich in natural resources, both finite and renewable. Any person from the less-fortunate parts of the world would want to benefit from our social-democratic society in a heartbeat.

So, where does the pessimism towards our potential stem from? Well, if we take a look at what the state (not nation) of Britain was, and still is, we can quickly arrive at one of the root-causes. The state of Britain was formed as an imperialistic state made out of sub-servant nations. Its sole purpose was to take advantage of the opportunities for establishing an empire at the time of its creation. And what does any empire not want? Rebellion. An imperialistic state depends on its sub-servant nations being obedient and productive to maximise expansion, and the best way to do this is to consolidate the cultures of its member nations into a fabricated state culture. This is exactly what happened to Scotland. Our culture was taken away and replaced by British culture, leading to anyone who still involves themselves in Scottish culture being seen as alien and dissident. Up until recently, with the resurgence of nationalism, anyone seen to be indulging themselves in Scottish culture was seen as being extremely parochial and regressive. 

It is not nationalism which is regressive however, it is the British state. You do not have to look far to see the desperate attempts by Westminster to keep that fabricated 'British nation' going, just think back to the recent onslaught we received from the British media regarding the 'Jubilympics'. What Britain represents is an archaic imperialistic view of the world, and the consolidation of nations' cultures in the name of pragmatism. The fact of the matter is the British state was not born out of a unionist-fabricated romanticised love which each nation of the British Isles felt for each other – neither was it born out of a democratic vote - it was born out of pragmatism and the desire of the aristocracy to maximise their economic potential.

 I personally find it insulting when a Westminster politician tries to make out that it was the British public which chose to enter a union. That, is nonsense, the masses had no say in the matter. The people of Scotland and England were forced into a parliamentary union in 1707 by the top echelons of society in order to exploit the masses on a global scale. One of the founding principles of the British state was greed, after the union was formed the Scottish aristocracy received huge amount of capital from Westminster; no doubt arranged bribery. The people of Scotland were so annoyed at the loss of their independence, that there were months of riots in Glasgow, and marshal law had to be established in Glasgow. These initial rebellions were crushed however, and with time, British rule prevailed

So there's the historical reasons for modern disbelief among many Scots, and that's the thing about history it is harsh and unfair, but it does serve as good hindsight for how we can make progressive decisions for our nations’ future. What can be said then to make Scots believe in Scotland? Well, we have a very long list of our contributions to the world. These include industrial might (Glasgow once built a fifth of the world's shippage), creative prowess, and intellectual strength (Television, telephone, tarmac, penicillin and radar to name a few). In fact, to paraphrase the British prime-minister Winston Churchill: "Only the ancient Greeks may have contributed nearly as much too modern society as the Scots." 

Scotland can also be proud of its progressive social-democratic values. Scotland, throughout democratic history, has traditionally voted for social-democratic governments, where all citizens of our country, regardless of race, religion, sex or creed, receive equal welfare provisions. Where everyone can receive some of the best education in the world with primary, secondary and higher education provided based on the merits of the person, not their wealth. Where the most vulnerable in our society are provided the support they need by the government which we elect, not profit-driven corporations. Where all workers can be assured that the country they contribute to provides a safety-net for them for whatever ill fortune they may have. Where our public services, such as an NHS, police, fire-service, and councils are protected from cuts, and privatisation, so that they are focused on providing the best service they can to the people of their country, rather than trying to claw back the money they have lost from government cuts and not working for profit due to privatisation.

To bring this conglomeration of thoughts to a conclusion, I would say that Scotland does have a lot to be proud of, both in our history and in our modern day Scotland. Do not be fooled by the pessimistic ramblings of the unionist parties. Scotland is a country with a strong intellect, a hard-working population, a 21^st century economy that is not just stable but has the potential to become exponentially successful for our population size and progressive social-democratic values. Believe in yourself, and believe in your country; fear will only hold our country back, it is positivity that a modern Scotland needs.

Based On Principle Not Party-Politics

It is a saddening state of affairs when the independence movement is automatically assumed to be a sole SNP movement, and that everything to do with Scottish independence is to do with the SNP. The march for Scottish independence on the 22nd of September 2012 however, forever destroyed this claim. For anyone who attended the event, or indeed seen videos or photos of the event, will have seen that the independence campaign is a vast cross-party, cross-social and cross-ideological campaign that stretches far beyond the role of the SNP.

Attending the march myself I saw a myriad of different groups showing their support for the campaign, this ranged from the Scottish Socialist Party, Solidarity, Scottish Greens, LGBT, SMNT (Scottish Militant Ninja Turtles), Pensioners, Youth and Students, Women, Christians, Trade Unionists, Labour, International campaigners, SNP and those marching just out of pure principle (I also saw 'Shinty players for independence'...). The breadth and variety of the groups taking part is the main signal from the march, it is a campaign based purely out of principle not politics.

The cohesion and solidarity demonstrated by all groups at the event shows that this is a campaign based on securing the best future for Scotland, for all those who live in Scotland, not for securing political power. All participating groups in the event are fighting for the principles of a fairer society, democracy, a secure economy for future generations, and just being able to make our own decisions.

All groups involved in the campaign want a Scotland in which they can have a real say and influence on how their country is governed. To not be governed by an unrepresentative parliament, built on old-world principles of greed and imperialism, both of which values transpire well into today's world. You do not have to look far to see examples of this. Both the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan were blatant resource-grab attempts by Westminster, Iraq is one of the largest oil producers in the world and Afghanistan has the 2nd largest deposits of rare earth metals on earth.

The greed demonstrated by Westminster is also extremely prevalent in our own country. Millions suffer savage welfare cuts by Westminster which leave the most vulnerable in our society worse off. Billions per year are being pumped into a failed program of 'quantitative easing', which has inflated our currency to never before seen levels, to bail-out a failed, unregulated banking sector which is the very thing which ruined our economy. All the while high-flying bankers who caused the economic disasters are receiving bonuses in the billions and corporation-tax cuts from Westminster.

All groups at the event want an end to this mismanagement. We were marching for the principle of being able to manage our own country, and shape our destiny in a way which provides a real benefit for the people of Scotland. I want to stress by 'Scotland', I do not mean just Scots. Anyone who lives in Scotland and considers it their home, I consider just as Scottish and myself. Politics and ideological differences may divide us, but we are united through principle, standing up for fairness and self-determination.

Based on Co-operation, not separation.

Part of a short-series of articles aiming to explore the positives of the Yes campaign demonstrated in the march for independence.

Many seem to speculate on the Yes movement and draw the conclusion that in wanting independence, we are separating ourselves from the British Isles, and indeed the rest of the world. What was demonstrated on the 22^nd of September in the March & Rally for Scottish Independence however, proved quite the opposite.

Those who attended the march may have noticed the myriad of foreign flags being shown at the event; all from other small European nations such as our self, in pursuit of their own self-determination. The nations shown included: Catalonia, Flanders, Venice, Wales and the Basque Country, all of whom I dare say rivalled our show of Saltires and Lion Rampant’s.

Every nation representing themselves at the event melded together harmoniously, all chatting, dancing, and chanting together as one. What this shows is that the march was not just about Scotland’s self-determination, it represents the worldwide movement for those who want to determine their own destiny. It represents the freedom which all people desire, to be able to know that all the decisions being made in their country are fully representative of their views, aspirations, needs, and priorities.

It represents countries not wanting to be treated as a mere region, which is only there in the central governments’ mind to finance the capital, or to be used as a mere stepping stone to power. Scotland, and all other small European nations, just want to be a part of the world. We want to co-operate together as equal partners to create a fairer, more democratic world which the people of small nations like our own have a chance to contribute to and shape the world we live in, by having our voices fully represented on a national and international scale, not being filtered through an unrepresentative parliament.

The enthusiasm for co-operation demonstrated at the march by all nations just shows how well people get along when they put their views across as equal partners from different countries, because then it can be assured that both sides are fully representative of the people’s views, not a compromise from being part of a dysfunctional union in which unequal nations are said to have an equal input on an international scale.

Scotland does not want independence based purely on our desire to separate ourselves from the rest of the world. We want to be a part of, and contribute to the world. We want to work closely with our European and international neighbours to create a fairer and more democratic world.

Scottish Food & Drink Industry Booming.

The most recent reports from the Scottish Government show that the Scottish food & drink industry is booming. Recent statistics show that the whole industry is worth an estimated £5.4bn to the Scottish economy. In stark contrast to the many news stories published concerning how many British industries are on the decline, the Scottish food & drink industry is in fact, on the rise, and has exceeded previous expectations. 

The original expectations were to increase the industry value to £5.1 billion by 2017. A figure which was already surpassed six years ago. Whiskey, the main product for Scotland in the industry, in 2011 was worth an estimated £4.23 billion (a 23% rise on 2010).

Our exports have seen a major rise. France is up 18%, with £825 million. The USA is up 30%, with £726 million. Exports in Asia have seen a large rise of 44%, Singapore totals £319 million, and China totals £92 million.

What this demonstrates is the strength and ingenuity of the Scottish people & economy even in hard times when the British economy is falling further into recession, economic output is severely flat-lining, and budget deficit reductions are doing virtually nothing to help our total debt of £1 trillion. This recent growth in the Scottish economy however will do nothing to benefit Scotland if the revenues are just going into subsidising a failing economic policy that is dragging the country further into recession.

With independence, (you knew this was coming) Scotland could have full control over all its economic levers and ensure fully that growths in our economy can go back into benefiting the Scottish economy, and not into the pockets of Westminster. It is a well-known fact that Scotland contributes more to the union than we get in return. The GERS report (Government Expenditure & Revenues Scotland) concluded that we have 8.4% of the UK population, contribute 9.6% of the tax revenues,(not counting  and receive 9.3% of government spending. 

With all revenues from the Scottish economy going back into the Scottish economy, we could multiply the growth we have seen under the status quo exponentially.

It is preposterous to state that a government which Scotland did not vote for, who has a completely different political standing from the vast majority of Scottish voters, and is London-centric in its policies can deliver an economic plan for Scotland which will fully ensure that our economy properly grows.

A detailed breakdown of the revenues from foreign exports is provided here:

2011 food and drink exports:Total food: £1.16bn – up 8.6% on 2010 – up 62% on 2007
Total drink: £4.23bn – up 23% on 2010 – up 50% on 2007

Top 5 whisky markets 2011:United States: £655m (+31%)
France: £535m (+27%)
Singapore: £318m (+44%)
Spain: £259m (-3.4%)
South Africa: £166m (-1.9%)

Top 5 Food Markets 2011:France: £289.3m (+5%)
Irish Republic: £103.9m (+5.8%)
Spain: £87.4m (+0.7%)
Italy: £79.7m  (+16.1%)
Germany: £75.5m (+3.6%)

Why the political union simply doesn't work.

Many people think that in the UK, Scotland is as equally represented as any other member nation in the UK. There is a parliament which is elected by the people, for the people, by the proportion of the population in each area of the UK, right? Well, yes, but the problem of the political framework of the UK does not lie in the system of voting, it is the nature of the parliament and union itself.

Everyone will agree that Scotland and England have one thing we both seem destined never to agree on, politics. England is traditionally a Conservative voting nation, whilst Scotland is traditionally a Labour voting nation (well, SNP now, but Labour's a better example for the time being). You would think that these conflicted views would be represented by the elected government. Unfortunately that is not the case.

Time and time again Scotland has received the party which we never vote for, and probably never will vote for, but we have been still been governed by the Tory's on lot's of occasions. When looking at this from an objective viewpoint, this seems a bit off. A country which is meant to be an equal member of the UK, gets the government it is bent on avoiding, and only plenty of occasions has shafted Scotland to the point of obscenity (think Ravenscraig-esque).

The best example of this would be to look back onto the Thatcher years. Did we vote for the Tory's then? No. Did our vote for the Tory's increase whilst they were in power? No, it actually fell year on year. Margaret Thatcher's philosophy of free-market capitalism, privatisation and greed is good totally collides with the common psyche of the Scottish people.

This is a prime reason why the modern Scotland we live in needs independence, our political views are almost the complete opposite with the views of the ruling nation of the UK. (Let's face it, it is.) In the current political framework it is impossible for us to get the government we desire is our votes are swamped by English votes south of the border. It is only pure chance which sometimes gets us the government we actually  want. 

An independent Scottish Government would be able to be fully representative of the votes of its people. Not filtered and swamped out by the votes of another nation which almost has completely different views from Scotland. An independent Scottish parliament would be able to work directly for the Scottish people, and not be used as a mere stepping stone for other parties in England, to gain power in Westminster.

It would also be a good opportunity for Labour to start fresh, and re-discover its roots which made the party connect effectively with the Scottish people, and would really be able to benefit the Scottish society, as it would be a Scottish party working for Scotland, not Sullyhill.

It is important that Scotland looks to its future now, and does not dwell on the mistreatment of the past. We have always been a nation that has been able to be innovate and intuitive when faced with harsh times. It is time for a Scottish Government which can make it happen for the Scottish people. 

New Investment Plans for North Sea Oil Industry.

There has been recent heavy investment into the North Sea oil industry, as the Norwegian state-owned oil giant Statoil has announced it will a total of £18 billion in total into the industry to keep their fields pumping up until at least 2057.

In terms of the employment in the industry, the new investments plans will provide a massive boost. It is expected that 300 new jobs will be available in a new operation centre in Aberdeen, and a further 700 will be created in the process of the investment plans being implemented.

The plans came to light when David Cameron was on a visit to Norway. Some may say that this is a sign that the oil wealth will go to helping all areas of the UK, as it was the UK prime minister which signed the deal. That, unfortunately, is not the case. It has been shown that throughout the course of the North Sea oil history that Scotland rarely sees the effect of a £1.5 trillion industry, as all the revenues goes straight down to the London Exchequer.


The oil revenues raise an average of £30 billion per year across the whole of the UK, and since Scotland has 90% of the reserves, that means we should be getting £27 billion of the revenues surely. Again however, that does not happen. What we receive is a budget that gets shrunk each year; the budget we received last year amounted to £23 billion, which means Westminster gets £4 billion of the revenues Scotland made.

This recent heavy investment into the industry once again proves that the Scottish economy is thriving, and no doubt has the potential to prosper even further if we gain independence. As it means that the revenues we accrue can go directly to helping the people, industries, infrastructure and the society of Scotland as whole.

These recent events also should trump any argument saying that our oil industry is not profitable enough to help our nation survive on its own, or is dwindling fast. Unfortunately though, no amount of heavy investment into the industry will block out the scaremongering from the media, government and unionists.

It is only with full independence form Westminster that Scotland can truly show what it can do when competing on the global market, and to truly provide a secure and viable economic future for Scotland that will benefit the welfare of our society, which is undoubtedly the most important issue in any nation. Not fighting pointless wars or keeping needless weapons of mass destruction on our doorstep.

New Oil & Gas Industry Long-Term Plans.

The First Minister, Alex Salmond, has today revealed that he plans to put forward a long-term plan for Scotland's oil and gas industry, which to date is the largest industry sector in the UK. The industry contributes a fifth of UK corporation tax, and supports 440'000 UK-wide jobs. So it is vital that a long-term strategy is made to secure its future so it is a viable industry for Scotland, especially in the case of independence.

Although much speculation has been drawn to the viability of Scotland's oil industry by our unionist friends, there is still no doubt that the industry is a thriving one and has contributed much more to the Scottish economy than anything else has in recent years.

The industry has been functioning for the best part of 40 years now and has pumped an estimated 40 billion BOE (barrels of oil equivalent) worth approximately £300 billion in terms of revenue, into the London exchequer. Whilst some may think the oil fields are drying up, there is still an estimated £1.5 trillion value of revenue still to be found in Scotland's geographical share of the oil fields. That figure has risen since the last estimate of £1.2 trillion. The UK-wide debt stands at £1 trillion, to which our share of the debt would be £100 billion.

Out-with the UK, the government is also investing heavily in securing investment from foreign markets. The organisation Scottish Development International (SDI) is to be expected to invest in growing markets in such areas as, Norway, Brasil & West Africa. The investment in those areas is to be built on the success of the establishment of an SDI base in Calgary, Canada.

What this proves is that Scotland, as a whole. Does have the potential to be an international leader in the markets we pursue, forget the arguments that we are too wee and too poor to possibly compete with larger nations around the world. All it takes is motivation and ingenuity, a trait which the Scottish people have shown their fair share of throughout history.

Under the current status quo however, Scotland is very limited in its ability to invest in our industries, with our constantly shrinking budget provided by Westminster. Some may say that it is the budget we receive which keeps our economy afloat. The reality however is the complete opposite, Scotland contributes £50 billion a year into the exchequer in terms of tax and revenues, yet we only receive on average, £23 billion back each year. 

The plan aims to further the astronomical success delivered by our North Sea oil revenues, and to secure a future for the industry when new fields are discovered. The plan draws up six main points that need to be addressed:

* Strengthen domestic supply chain - with greater focus on resource recovery and targeting £30 billion in total annual sales by 2020;

* Increase proportion of sales from exports - so international activity, having risen from 31 to 46 per cent from 2002 to 2010, reaches 60 per cent (£18 billion) by 2020;

* Identify clear priorities for innovation and accelerating technology deployment - including long-term research & development plan and greater co-ordination of public funds to support rise in recovery rates with a minimum long-term target of 50 per cent;

* Promote new and emerging opportunities for supply chain companies - for example in offshore wind, carbon capture & storage (CCS) and decommissioning;

* Ensure sector attracts young people and supports increase in skills availability - emphasising long-term nature of industry and, through closer liaison between sector employers and with education institutions, better-identify specific needs for provision;

* Continue to promote Scotland as key location for O&G investment - through communications and support for key infrastructure projects.

BBC bias demonstration - Pacific Quay, Glasgow.

For those of you who of not know, and that may be quite a few due to the media blackout, there was a BBC bias demonstration on Saturday. The purpose of the demonstration was to highlight the blatant, but subtlety done, anti - independence bias which gets thrown out by the BBC on a daily basis. I for one, attended the demonstration. And although there was not it was only a small first time event, it surely shows that the people of Scotland are starting to take notice of the bias at the BBC, and are no longer willing to tolerate it.

You might think this is a rather odd claim that the BBC are politically partisan. After all, they are publicly funded (£3 billion from us a year) and are always championing their impartiality. That sadly however, is not the case. For however great the BBC's shows and documentaries are (especially Sherlock), their news coverage is not as fair as it always claims to be.

The part of the BBC news reporting that is usually seen to be most prevalently biased is the slanted coverage often given by their reporters and presenters, were looking at you Paxman. usually whenever an interview comes up with a pro independence supporter comes up, the BBC almost always wheels out their. presenters who are most famously anti-independence.

Now, I do not need to go into every instance about BBC bias, you can check that out on this brilliant website here: http://biased-bbc.blogspot.co.uk/

Picture of the demonstration I took. 

Without going on too much a rant about the BBC (believe me I could), I would just like to encourage every Scot to attend these demonstrations, as it sends a strong message to the BBC that, we the people who fund their existence, will no longer tolerate bias coverage on our nations issues.

Economic awareness for Scotland.

It has became increasingly apparent to me, and I am sure many other Nat, that the vast majority of the Scottish population do not actually know the state of their own economy. 

This is very detrimental to the success of the YES campaign, as Scots who will not vote yes in 2014, could of very well otherwise been swayed by learning about the truth about their own economy.

As you know, it is money which is at the back of everyone's minds when they make decisions about their future, and perhaps the biggest question which is on everyone's minds concerning the independence debate is, will we have enough money to survive? 

Despite what rhetoric and scaremongering we are told on a daily basis by Westminster and the London-centric British media, the Scottish economy is actually thriving as we speak and we could do far more without the current economic constraints imposed by Westminster which we live under day by day.

I was just wondering if any Nat's who are interested in the economic side of the debate like I am, would like to collaborate to produce a report on the Scottish economy. Detailing such aspects as; how we are doing now, and what we could do with independence. 

I have already made a 3000 word report for the monthly independence newsletter which will be coming out in June, but I think if we all pull together we could produce something which would shoot down any unionist economic scaremongering on sight. And hey, you never know it might get somewhere. 

Reply on this post of email me at: robertboy1@hotmail.co.uk , if you're interested.

 thanks. 

"YES Scotland" campaign kick off this Friday!

Today it has been announced that the YES campaign for Scottish independence will take place in Edinburgh on Friday (25th May) in Edinburgh in the Cineworld complex. The campaign is entitled "YES Scotland." and the campaign will try to put across the positive case for Scottish independence.

The campaign will include a host of notable Scottish celebrities (Sean Connery to not just one), musicians and of course politicians, and will attempt to connect with the Scottish people on a personal level by introducing people to the debate who are recognisable to the every-day Scot.

The main focus of the campaign however is not to appeal to those who are already in support of independence, but to swing those 20% something per cent of Scots who are undecided. The campaign will also have an anthem written by Dougie McLean, famous for his "Caledonia".

A wide-range of pro-independence parties will join alongside the SNP in the campaign, these include the Greens and the SSP, but more parties are believed to join up once the campaign gets rolling. One of the visions of the campaign which I personally agree with most is the slogan "vision versus scares".

 This is a vital aspect of the campaign as it is know all too well by pro-independence supporters the extent to which pro-unionist parties & media broadcast effectively scaremongering claims on a daily basis. The problem with the scare-stories is that the vast majority of the Scots watching the mainstream media do not know any better, as anything on mainstream media is taken as gospel effectively.

Angus Robertson who is the campaign leader for all of the SNP's elections, commented on how effective the campaign could be at winning over the undecided Scot through positivity:

“These are exciting times for Scotland as we work to build a better nation.  The Yes Scotland campaign will be about the people of Scotland, and how being independent can make life better for families and individuals across our country.

“It will be the biggest community-based campaign in our history and will take the case for Scotland being independent into every community across our country.

“Yes Scotland stands in stark contrast to the anti-independence parties' emerging No campaign, which we are led to believe will put the politicians front and centre.

“The people of Scotland are open to voting yes as never before and that is a great starting point for the Yes Campaign.  This campaign will be about the positive benefits of being independent, enabling us to build a Scotland that will be fairer and more prosperous than today.”

As to be expected, there has been a major backlash from the unionist parties, downplaying the campaigns effectiveness and credibility. One Conservative MSP Jackson Carlaw said that the campaign was a "Braveheart cry for 'yes' to separation". There's a few problems with this: First of all, he automatically loses the debate by mentioning Braveheart as a case for independence. Secondly, I woonder if Mr. Carlaw would apply the term 'separation' to any other country which sought independence from Westminster. 

Newsletter article

Just a quick update here, I have just finished writing an article for a monthly independence newsletter which should be coming out around the middle of June. It amounted to a little over 3000 words and covers every aspect of the Scottish economy, even the McCrone report ;)

Be sure to check it out.

Self-Determination is vested in the people, not a party.

Nowadays when anyone thinks of Scottish nationalism/independence it automatically brings up connotations of the Scottish National Party (SNP). Whilst they may be the main advocates of the independence movement and have by far made the most progress for independence, it is wrong to assume the value of self-determination belongs solely to the SNP.

It should be vested in the population of Scotland, that we all have a common goal to be independent. Although Scotland itself has many divisions politically, socially and culturally, we can come together to bring to reality the right to self-determination that deep down all Scottish people desire. Many Scottish people nowadays are either too ignorant or scared of nationalism to appreciate what it could truly do for our nation.

By definition the meaning of nationalism is expressed as follows

"The desire for a strongly linked group of individuals for self-governance"

Now those definitions seem a far cry from the common ideas associated with the word nationalism. Truthfully, most people associate nationalism with the Nazi’s. That regime was utterly un-human in every way; there is no doubt about that. It should not however be associated with the nationalistic movement of the Scottish people. We are fighting for the right to control our own currency, elect our own government, assure all our revenues go directly to the Scottish people and not Westminster, and to fulfil our aspirations to become of modern nation which clearly has the potential to become a world competitor. The nationalism we pursue is the right to self-determination, something all humans desire to have, a chance to stand on your own two feet and show the world what you can do.

As such notions as the Nazi’s are associated with fear, so does the British media try to associate nationalism with fear. You do not need to go far to find evidence; just look at the front page of the Scottish Sun 2007 election edition. In bold letters on the front it says “VOTE SNP AND YOU PUT SCOTLAND’S HEAD IN THE NOOSE”. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think we have descended quite into the hell-hole the Scottish Sun had prophesised since the SNP had been elected then.  

There are in fact many other political parties within Scotland that support independence. Such as the Scottish Green party, Socialist Party and Solidarity and many Union advocates (at one point the Scottish Lib Dems also supported independence). These parties however are rarely associated with the independence movement, sometimes not at all and the example in the afore-mentioned paragraph is an example of the dangers that one party association with independence brings. It gives the unionist a chance to alienate the SNP as being the party that is trying to ‘tear this country apart’ as they are seen as the only advocates of independence, not with the common interests of the whole nation.

To bring this to a close, it is vital that the independence movement as a whole does not pledge allegiance to one party, but instead to the nation of Scotland itself. As that is what we are all fighting for, that one chance for Scotland to be its own nation again, a nation that we can shape for the future and call our own, a nation which can voice its opinions on the international stage, not in a minority position in a government which is far out of touch from the real people of Scotland.

The BBC state?

Pretty much any independence supporter, such as myself, will have noticed to continuing outcry from Scotland concerning the questionable impartiality of the (publicly funded, by us) BBC when it comes to Westminster government stories, and most importantly any story surrounding the independence referendum. One might say, surely enough a world-renowned corporation such as the BBC with decades of broadcasting heritage would not possibly harbour bias opinions! Wrong.

It has become increasingly apparent to me, and other supporters/ advocates of the independence movement that any coverage on the independence referendum has been given the bare minimum coverage, and even when it does a seemingly bias coverage. Now, it is a well-known fact that the majority of the Scottish population are extremely ignorant when it comes to the understanding of their own country. The real state of the Scottish economy, our history with the union and the swathes of benefits that would come with independence are forlorn to the knowledge of most of the Scottish population.

I do not need to go into the overwhelming sea of facts about Scottish independence; there are countless resources available, if you search for them. Just look at my previous blog posts/ articles and you should have a rough understanding of my ‘beef’ with the British government/media (hint: McCrone report – check it out).

Over the past say, two years since the independence referendum became a real issue following the SNP’s landslide victory during the 2010 election, I have seen at most, half a dozen full stories on the independence referendum debate(on the BBC television news). Even though, as everyone will admit, it is the most important decision in our constitutional history in the past 300 years.  Even when there is coverage and interviews it is done by extremely evidently bias reporters such as the man himself, Jeremy Paxman.

Watching interviews a while back between Jeremy Paxman & Alex Salmond it became increasingly obvious that Paxman was not the man for the job. Everything he said had contempt written all over it, the way he seemed to view himself aloof the Scottish people and claims that Scotland would be better off following independence. He seemed as though he felt the Scottish population were personally robbing his personal bank account every time Mr Salmond mentioned the 8% assets that Scotland would inherit if we became independent. Dismissing any claim that Scotland would be better off and swiftly moving onto a new question every time he was countered. I recall incidents such as when Paxman related Alex Salmond to Robert Mugabe and referred to Burns poetry as ‘sentimental doggerel’. You make your own mind up.

Whilst it is in human nature to put our own agenda’s in front of the real issue (we just cannot help it) the bias of the BBC is made increasingly worse by the fact that there is no mainstream media outlet for pro-independence views, apart from the  collective group of on-line independence supporters known as “Cyber-Nat’s”.  There are various websites that provide us with some form of an outlet, such as Newsnet Scotland, Radio Free Scotland and Bella Caledonia. They are extremely limited in their audience however, with only one finding them after personally searching for them, happening to stumble upon them or having a pro-independence friend. Whilst the BBC and other mainstream news corporations pump out nationwide news 24/7.

Although the conflicting views have not yet been broadcast by British media. There have been numerous reports done by foreign news companies, concerning the impartiality of the BBC.  Russia Today is a prime example.  The link can be found here:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tG3XtCmqI64

The report highlights the BBC being far too pro-government in its reports. A prime example being the NHS reform bill being proposed by the Con-Dem coalition. The report claims that the BBC gave far too little coverage on the issue, as it was highly controversial and not many people knew the facts about it. As a result the British public were unable to make any grounded opposition on the bill. It even prompted the opposition party Labour, to post an official complaint about their opposing views not being properly represented. This incident is also reflected when it comes to Scottish independence as the report claims. There was a video posted on You Tube which was a training conference by the BBC about reporting. The training video seemed to devote a lot of time to slandering the independence debate. Although the BBC claim it was impartiality, it is clear that they will always pander to who is in power, as it is from the population and government that the BBC receives it £3 billion a year, paid by us.

The incidents of bias reporting is not limited to the television, oh no. On the Scottish politics blogs and forums on the BBC Scotland website, comments sections seemed to be disabled altogether, especially those blogs made by official BBC reporters. It is no secret that in a democracy opposing views are vital to the overall breadth of knowledge of the population, and it is through having opposing views that people truly get the full picture and are able to articulate their views in a well thought out way and are less likely to spout opinions based on unfounded evidence.

This issue wouldn’t be so noticeable if the same rules applied for the rest of the UK political blogs but it is the fact that it was only the Scottish political blogs & forums that were blocked from comments. This once again harks back to the point that, the BBC know just as well as independence supporters do that the majority of the Scottish population are ignorant to the facts about independence. By blocking out opposing views, they ensure that the opposing views are never heard and the opinions never change.

To bring this to a conclusion, what can be done to change the status quo concerning the British media? Well, it is our duty as Nats to inform the Scottish population on matters about independence that they might never hear whilst just hearing mainstream news. Through any means possible, whether that be an internet blog, articles, letters to newspapers, radio shows, or heck even just letting your friends know. Eventually the word will get out there and the population will know, we have to keep the pressure on the British media to change, even though our voice may be small, it will be heard. 

The Results Are In.

The votes have been counted, and the results are in. All across Scotland people have voted for who they want to elected into, or remain in power. This time though, the elections seem to be different than expected. Anyone prior to the results being published would have thought that the SNP would gain another landslide victory, and in some areas that may be true, it is not true however in the main target that the SNP had its sights sets indefinitely on, Glasgow.

In the build-up to the elections, the SNP had been gaining major victories all across Scotland, in areas previously thought unchangeable. Most notably the die-hard Labour city of Glasgow. It seemed as though the SNP would have toppled the Labour administration in Glasgow, or at the least shifted the city to an NOC (No Overall Control) status. To some people’s surprise however, that was not the case. The city still remains a Labour controlled area, with four constituencies remaining purely in labour control (every other area is NOC).

Despite their hiccup in Glasgow, the SNP have enjoyed a relatively major boost across the board. Gaining 57 seats, this increases their total number of councillors to 424, making them the clear winners of the Scottish council elections. Labour trails closely behind by 30 councillors. What could be taken from this is that the SNP have reached the arc of their success and Labour is creeping back up to take power. That however, would be an incredibly short-sighted view.

What one has to take in mind is that these are the mid-term elections, the SNP are only halfway through their term. Mid-term elections are notorious for knocking down the power of the party in power. Just look at the elections south of the border, the Conservative & Liberal Democrat coalition has suffered heavy losses to the hands of Labour, something which is clearly mirrored up here in Scotland. These two correlating sets of results are reflective of the general feeling across the whole of the United Kingdom.

Following the banking crisis, the recession and the recent double-dip recession. The public has lost faith in the Westminster government. They are seen to be in favour of the bankers who caused the crisis in the first place, as they are generally regarded as the two parties most in favour of the wealthier echelons of society. This has caused the votes previously for the Con-Dem coalition to shift over to Labour’s hands as the public has lost faith in current government.

This has also happened in Scotland (to begin with we were never particularly fond of the Conservatives r the Liberal Democrats). Both the aforementioned parties have suffered heavy losses across the board, both losing a significant amount of votes to SNP & labour. The SNP however have heavily increased their support, gaining in more areas than any other party has. This clearly shows that Scotland is rejecting Westminster politics. Both the Conservative and Lib-Dem votes have shifted off to the SNP and Labour seemingly randomly.

The reason Labour has gained so many seats in correspondence to the SNP however is clearly not through their own efforts. Most people in Scotland are still ignorant to the real state of our nation and the SNP, and are still not ready to shift over to a nationalist government. Where is the next logical step for defective Lib-Dem and Conservative voters?  The next available Westminster party, Labour.

This is not a defeat for the SNP and the independence movement. It is a sign of our need to work harder to secure our right to self-determination. It is only through hard work and the constant efforts of individuals that Scotland will truly be shown the benefits of independence. Although that may be a large task, we’ve got the best of two years to make it happen. 

The Changing Game.

As the deadline for the voting on the local council elections in Scotland draws nearer, the main parties have really began to up their ante as many votes as possible.  Any Scottish citizen, say ten years ago, could pretty much predict the outcome of any local election. Labour here, wee bit of Tory down there and Lib Dem all the way up there. Up until the turn of the millennia, Scotland’s politics seemed as though they would never change. The main parties thought that they would always be elected into the seats they were expected to and basically thought ‘why bother? It’s never going to change anyways’… or at least they thought.

The year of 2007 was the real game changer. The SNP, for many years considered a fringe party, swept into government, much to the bewilderment of the former main parties. After almost identical results year in, year out… something had finally changed. For the first time since the Scottish Parliament was opened, we had a non-Labour government. What could be the reasons behind this? You may ask. Well, let’s try and find some reasons.

Coming from probably the most die-hard area for Labour control, North Lanarkshire, I had always been encompassed in a one-party state of mind. Everyone I knew supported Labour. Everyone in my family supported Labour. Every one of my teachers and friends at school supported labour. I was in a paradise for Labour supporters. I grew up in a Labour town, with a Labour family, with Labour friends and in a Labour country.

From my dad’s time growing up, almost everyone in my town was working class; they either worked in the foundries, factories or the railway. Not many people worked in the service or private sector. To everyone, Labour was the party for them, Trade-unions, fair wages and workers’ rights were all part of the Labour package. The Tory’s and the Lib Dems were seen as the party for the middle & upper-classes and the SNP were considered a strange nationalist fringe-party.

By the time Scotland arrived at my time on earth, the politics had hardly changed, but the society we lived in had. No factories in Coatbridge remained, the private & service sectors were flourishing and we hurtled towards a new millennium. Everyone in my generation in Coatbridge had come from a Labour family, in a Labour town. Which is precisely the problem, nothing up until recently in politics had changed, but our society is totally different from what it used to be in Scotland.

As recent evidence has shown, Scotland has moved forward into a quite breath-taking future. We have become the European centre for renewable energy Technology. We are showing signs of lower economic inactivity and higher employment than anywhere else in the UK outside of the South-East. The financial sector in Edinburgh is even doing well despite the infamous recession (and double-dip just recently, thank you ever much Mr Cameron), accounting for £7 billion GDP per annum. Heck, Scotland is slowly becoming one of the centres for games development, with Scotland being ranked 3^rd out of the 50 top games development countries in Europe.  With companies such as Rock Star, makers of the well-known GTA franchise.

All of these findings are in stark contrast to how Scotland used to be. The politics however up until recently were exactly how it used to be. The Westminster based parties, represent how Scotland used to be, not how it is now. Which is another reason for independence; we need a system of Scottish parties, working for Scotland and for the people of Scotland. Not Westminster parties treating our votes, as votes for Westminster. I would urge every Scot to vote against the Westminster parties, to show them that our nation is changing and that simply polishing the apple of yesterday to appeal to the old sectors of Scottish society will no longer work.