Apparently Scotland Doesn't Exist.

Recently there has been controversy surrounding the rather extraordinary claim made by a UK government report that states Scotland would not carry on any of the UK's current obligations and treaties, as Scotland was "extinguished" as a country following the formation of the union in 1707. The exact wording used by the report on page 75 states that:

"For the purpose of this advice, it is not necessary to decide between these two views of the union of 1707. Whether or not England was also extinguished by the union, Scotland certainly was extinguished as a matter of international law, by merger either into an enlarged and renamed England or into an entirely new state".

This may seem baffling for a lot of Scots, as we already all know that the UK is a union of nations, not regions, and certainly not an enlarged England. Isn't that why Scotland has its own legal, health, educational sectors and its own parliament after all, as it is a nation? Well, according to Westminster it is not, which certainly reveals a lot about the current attitude Scotland is receiving from Westminster.

The report, as always, is a clear attempt by guffawing Westminster peers to ramp up the scaremongering surrounding Scotland's constitutional future; to make Scots scared that their country is the only nation in the world that cannot become independent. This time by insinuating that Scotland is so entangled within Britain that it cannot possibly be independent without spending millennium renegotiating thousands of international treaties. With some quislings stating that up to 14'000 treaties would have to be completely reworked from scratch.

As always, however these claims have been falsified and found to be nothing but shallow scaremongering. The claim that Scotland would not carry on any of the UK's current obligations, by definition, means that Scotland would not have to shoulder any of the UK's current debt obligations. So that would actually work in Scotland's favour, cheers Westminster! No two countries on Earth would want to go through the situation which Westminster is proposing; as for the rUK that would entail reworking thousands of treaties to exclude Scotland.

This rigmarole brings to light a very important point in the independence referendum. To many at Westminster, Scotland is still considered to be a region; subservient and nonexistent. With independence, this condescending attitude handed to us by a government we did not elect would stop. We would be a nation again, having all the means necessary to run our own affairs to work for the citizens of our nation, and to elect government we actually want; not to be swamped out by millions of votes south of the border.

The dire nature of Scotland's current position within the United Kingdom can be effectively exemplified by referring to the vote by Scottish MP's on whether or not the Coalition should have went ahead with benefit cuts. A total of 81% of Scottish MP's in Westminster voted against the damaging cuts going through, and what happened? Yup, we still received the damaging cuts.

Unsurprisingly, Scotland's only Tory MP was interviewed by Scotland Tonight  and was asked whether or not he felt comfortable with the claim that Scotland was basically no longer a country; he unequivocally replied "Yes". It truly is a sad state of affairs when a democratically elected representative of a country is happy saying that his country does not exist and is subservient to a government which it did not elect. This fully brings to light the damaging relationship some Scottish MP's have with Westminster; fully willing to go against their nations interests and natural state as an independent nature to please the party their country did not elect, and has consistently voted against.

The Path to a Fairer Society

One of my main driving points for desiring an independent Scotland is the prospect of my country being able to properly deal with societal issues issues such as inequality and rampant greed; both of which are extremely prevalent in modern day Britain. It is no secret that the UK is one of the most unequal countries in the modern industrialised world. The UK social equality currently sits at 28th out of the 34 OECD countries ranked on the Gini Coefficient; making the UK the 6th most unequal country in the industrialised world. Since the beginning of the recession, this has been the elephant in the room for Westminster.

Ever since the coalition was formed in the 2010 elections we have heard nothing but "we'll all have to suffer together", and the "Big Society". All the while we have seen every single millionaires earnings rise by £90'000 per year, and working families' incomes decrease by £800 per year. This to me, is a clear signal that Scotland needs full control over its economics, political, and social levers. It has already clearly been shown since Devolution Scotland has pursued a different path compared to the rest of the UK. In England & Wales we have seen public services being privatised; with areas of the NHS being outsourced to private companies, and talks of all Fire Services in England being handed over to private companies.

Gini Coefficient for the UK

This is very damaging for Scotland. Although we do under devolution control an array of powers that help us to distinguish ourselves form the rest of the UK and pursue policies which benefit the people of our nation; it is still not nearly enough. Pretty much all "Big Three" parties in Westminster heavily influence their Scottish subsidiaries, pulling strings behind the scenes to make Westminster policies flow, from a government we did not elect, directly into Scotland. There is clear evidence of these damaging practices happening.

Johann Lamont the Scottish Labour leader recently caused major controversy when she openly opposed universal welfare by stating that "Scotland is the only country in the world where we get everything for nothing". This came as a shock to many Labour voters who felt betrayed by the party they support, as this claim went against pretty much all traditional Labour values of social-democracy. After this rigmarole, Johann was quickly given a seat on the Labour Cuts Commission down in Westminster; I don't know about you but I smell a sell-out. This is a prime example of why Scottish politics need to stop being influenced by Westminster politicians.

Under Independence, all parties operating in Scotland would cease to be influenced by Westminster politics. This would mean that Labour, the Lib-Dem's, and even the Tories, would have to work for Scotland. They would have to put out policies which would appeal to the Scottish population; a population which has already shown to want to pursue a different path than that offered by Westminster. A more social-democratic, equitable path that would ensure that Scottish society, and politics, would not be influenced by the greed and corruption of Westminster.

Independence would also guarantee Scotland the proper powers in order to effectively tackle inequality in our country. It would enable a government, which the Scottish people actually elect, to use the full range of powers to put our views into our society. This claim is backed up by Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz who says that without independence Scotland cannot hope to effectively deal with problems such as wealth distribution, welfare, and inequality.

He presented his information, along with other leading economists, in the first Fiscal Commission Working Group Report. The report clearly states that since 1975, inequality in the UK has risen faster than any other industrialised country; and continues to do so. This has a stifling effect on prosperity and growth; it is no surprise that the most equal nations on Earth are among the most prosperous.

In conclusion, it can be surmised that Scotland needs independence if we, the people of Scotland, want to have a hope at addressing the growing problem of inequality in our nation. The full range of powers offered by independence would enable us to fully put to practice our views, and would enable us to build a society around the ideals we hold dear; without them being tarnished and influenced by Westminster.

New Independence March and Rally Website

Last year in September as many of you will probably know there was an independence march and rally in Edinburgh. This was the first of 3 march & rallies that are taking place every year up until the referendum in 2014. Despite a lack of awareness in mainstream media, no doubt thanks to the Beeb, around 10'000 people showed up to show their support for the independence campaign.

Attending the march & rally myself, I have to say it was one of the best days of my life so far. The marchers assembled in the Meadows the marched through Edinburgh until we reached the Princes Street Gardens where the rally took place full of speakers, music, and a great atmosphere. Despite what you may have heard from the BritNats, the march was one of the most civilised demonstrations I have ever seen. Apart from the scuffle in the Gardens that took place when three right-wing SDL members set up camp at the back of the rally with union jacks and proceeded to hurl abuse at the crowd. When one person had enough and went to remove the union flag, he was attacked and the SDL members were taken away by the Lothian and Borders Police.

Now the march and rally in 2013 is set to become exponentially larger than the previous one; which despite its lack of coverage still turned out to be a great success. There is to be a larger venue, more coverage and campaigning to raise awareness, and a host of new speakers and bands to be announced. This however, cannot happen without people who support independence pitching in and all doing their part to raise awareness and funds. The march is not funded by either Yes Scotland or any of the political parties that support independence. It is a grass roots campaign that is wholly reliant on the people of Scotland working together to make it happen.

It is vitally important that all of us who support independence put as much effort as we can into making this happen. It represents the non-partisan collective voice of Scotland that says that we as a nation wants the chance to control our own future and destiny. And that it is a movement supported by the whole length and breadth of our nation; regardless of race, nationality, gender, class, sexual preference. It represents the civic voice of Scotland that says:

 "We have the will and the means to control our own future, and we're not afraid to take control."

MARCH AND RALLY WEBSITE

The Better Together Economy Shrinks Yet Again

Circulating the media today like wildfire there has been the news that the UK economy has shrunk in the last quarter of 2012 by 0.3%. Do you know what that means folks? The double-dip recession could well now turn into a triple-dip; as a recession is indicated by a contraction by at least 0.2% for two consecutive quarters. The reasons for the decline are still a little hazy. The ONS (Office for National Statistics) claims that the dip is largely due to a drop in North Sea oil production.

UK economy growth, as a % of GDP. 

I strongly suspect that the Quisling-sphere is already blazing alight with bold claims that this drastic news foreshadows cataclysmic effects for Scotland's economy if we do vote to become independent in 2014; as this must signify the fall of the oil industry. Further reading into this news however, reveals that this was due to delayed maintenance at the UK's largest oil field off the coast of Aberdeen.; the Buzzard oil field which produces around 10% of the UK's yearly oil output. The company who owns the field, Nexen, said that:

"The shutdowns occur every five years, [they] are planned, and are required in order to comply with regulatory requirements. The shutdowns enable us to repair and upgrade equipment that cannot be accessed when the facilities are operating."

Therefore it can be seen clearly that the drop in oil production is due to scheduled maintenance, necessary in order to keep the fields operational. I would hope that the Unionist imperial keyboard army will read this obvious reason for a drop in production, and steer themselves away from the rhetorical scaremongering about how any drop in production means the doom of the oil industry; sadly however, that is never the case.

It is the nature of an oil industry for it to fluctuate whenever a plant is shut down. It is however a much more secure base for an economy than the current UK economy has; which is 60% reliant on the banking sector. Without the drop in oil production, it has been reported that the UK economy would have only shrank by 0.1%. Not enough the merit a recession, yes, but it is still barely missing a recession, and it does indicate stagnation; which is not good enough.

Evidence to show that the Scottish economy, in contrast, is not failing as some Unionists will undoubtedly try to have the whole country believe, can be found in recent statistics over Scotland's exports. Scotland's worldwide exports have recently rocketed, seeing a £1.6 billion rise in the value of goods sold overseas. A shining example of such growing strength in Scottish exports is the Edinburgh-based electronics firm, MESL Microwave. The company produces components for the growing space industry, including the US agency NASA. The company currently exports 70% of the products they make, and despite a global slowdown, Scottish exports have seen a higher rate than in 2010.

As expected the Coalition government is already reeling in discontent as to why their policy of cutting is still not working, and throwing out the excuses. The best I personally have heard today is that the bad weather, lack of Christmas shopping, and EU sabotage are to blame. It is time for the Coalition government to stop using excuses, and to stop going through with their damaging cuts like petulant children wanting to prove that they were right all along.


An example on how our society could be mended differently can be found in Iceland. Most people when hearing about Iceland will instantly spring to mind thoughts of how Iceland is still a country hit harshly by the recession and is an example of what Scotland would be like following independence .What most people do not know however is that since the financial crash, Iceland has been making a remarkable recovery and is now the fastest recovering nation in Europe; with 7 straight quarters of growth.

What the Icelandic government has done is to pursue a much different path than that taken by Westminster. To start with, unlike Westminster, Iceland tackled the real cause of the crash, the banks. The government, and the people, jailed the bankers who ruined their economy, rewrote their constitution in order to pursue a different path, and most importantly bailed out their population, not the bankers. They have also taken a much different path than Austerity, the Icelandic government effectively slapped taxes on almost everything, even fizzy drinks, to keep a stable stream of income.

This enabled the country to keep their broad welfare state wholly intact. When quizzed about this, the Icelandic government said that it is ultimately important that they keep their welfare state intact, in order to keep their workforce healthy, and educated. Interestingly enough, BBC Scotland interviewed the former mayor of the wealthiest suburb in Reykjavik , who is very much on the right-wing and follows Thatcherite thinking. She says that, even though she believes in the free market, the welfare state is vital, and to harm it would severely hinder recovery. And look at what we have in the UK, no recovery until 2017, and a Prime Minster on course to raise the UK national debt more than any other Prime Minister in history; more than Brown and Blair put together.

If we in Scotland really want to see our country mend, we need independence. There is no sense in saying that the long-term decisions about Scotland are better made by a government which Scotland did not elect, and by a parliament which has shown time and time again that it cannot see further than the edge of its own bridge (to paraphrase Brian Cox at the Yes Scotland launch). We will benefit from being able to plan how we want our society to be managed, and how to prevent our country from slipping into the drastic financial situation which we are currently in again. The UK recovered faster out of the Great Depression in the 1930's, is this recent news not surely a sign that Scotland needs to take back the powers that were stolen from us, and to pursue a path which benefits the people of our country; not the rich few of a corrupt parliament and banking system?

The Horror of £1 for Independence

Recently there has been chaos in the Yes campaign as they try to get their heads around the catastrophic information that every Scot would be £1 a year worse off if we were to be independent. This is surely the sign that our country would be thrown into third-world status, doomed to an existence of poverty and economic turmoil. This is what the No camp will have you believe. Even now the top brass at No HQ are painting a picture of economic disaster for Scotland, claiming that Alex Salmond and his cronies are liars, and that Scotland would be astronomically better off staying in the UK.

Let's take a look at what the cost of £1 a year for independence will be shall we? First of all, that is £1 a year for the removal of trident, a written constitution that would ensure a home for everyone in Scotland, 100% reliance on renewable's by 2020, a government we elect, policies made to benefit Scotland not London, an end to a corrupt banking sector controlling our economy, a more equitable country, an economic asset worth 10 times more than our share of the UK national debt, an end to politics being controlled by the upper classes of society, a more diversified economy, an oil fund ensuring welfare for all generations ,and a chance to represent ourselves 100% on a global scale. All that for £1 a year? Now, I don't know about you, but I'm a sucker for a bargain.

It is clear to me now that the No camp are really scarping the bottom of their already worn-out barrel. Scottish independence is fast becoming the only option to end the plague of corporate-controlled politics poisoning our country today. As the referendum draws closer, it will become apparent to the Scottish population that independence is not an end, it is a means to decide what country we want to be. Do we want to live in a a country where the most wealthy in society control politics? Do we want to live in a country where bankers who have ruined this country keep getting wealthier through recessions, all the while the poor are being demonized by the government? I think it is time to say no to these outrageous practices in our society.

Scotland, with independence, has the chance to show the world that there is a different path to prosperity, than the one offered by the current UK government. We will have the chance to work alongside our European neighbors, to work for the interests of our people. If you were to look at the most prosperous countries in the world, they are all small European countries in Scandinavia, and countries such as Iceland, and Ireland. What do they have that we do not currently? Full control over their economic resources, full representation on a global scale, and policies that are made to benefit the people of their country.

All of the above listed countries have pursued an equitable, social-democratic path, that ensures that everyone in their country has public services that work for the benefit of the people they serve, not shareholders, and a welfare system that ensures no one will fall into destitution and will not be demonized for being less-fortunate than the top 100 of society that made enough money in 2012 to end world-poverty 4 times over. It is time to choose a different path, all you have to do is vote Yes in 2014.

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.