The Scots Nats are perpetual trouble-makers who will do anything and everything to aggravate the English. It's about time we turned the tables on them.....
A way to save the Union from the cunning Nats
The Scots Nats are perpetual trouble-makers who will do anything and everything to aggravate the English. It's about time we turned the tables on them
It's time for a dose of realism about Scotland's future. Photo: Getty Images
By Bruce Anderson
21 Mar 2015
The Telegraph
784 Comments
The divergence is absolute and could prove fatal. In England, many voters are already bored with the election campaign, which has hardly begun. But large parts of North Britain are in the grip of religious mania. Scottish friends of mine, who thought that they understood their own country, now feel bewildered, marginalised – and threatened. The Scot Nats’ concept of Scotland is totalitarian. If you do not agree with them, you are no true Scot.
A year ago, phrases such as safe seat, rotten borough and Stalinist permafrost would have been inadequate to describe the Labour Party’s grip on Glasgow. For a generation, mediocrity had followed mediocrity, Tam McJimmy would be succeeded by Jimmy McTam, all members for Glasgow Glottal Stop, each as bad as the other. This seemed set to continue until the end of time. Now, Labour could be wiped out in Glasgow. The utterly incredible has been replaced by the almost inevitable.
The UK could become a federal state, with England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland each having its own Parliament, in charge of all domestic issues, including welfare, plus income tax. The federal Parliament would replace the House of Lords. It would deal with foreign affairs, defence and monetary policy as well as some law and order issues
Apropos of inevitability, and whatever the outcome in the rest of the UK, the next Parliament is bound to be disrupted by around 30 Scot Nats, intent on perpetual trouble-making. They will do anything and everything to provoke the English. In the 1880s, when the whole of the island of Ireland was within the United Kingdom, much of current parliamentary procedure was hurriedly improvised to deal with Parnell’s attempts to inflict mayhem on Westminster in order to further the cause of Irish nationalism. Within a few weeks, there will be a repetition.
Cunning Nats have always planned to irritate the English in order to convince them that Scotland is more trouble than it is worth. The Referendum campaign helped, because many English drew two conclusions. First, that the Scots had no legitimate grounds for complaint. Second, that they did not seem to like England and the English. Nat-induced chaos in Westminster will reinforce that impression.
So is there any way to save the Union? Let us start with a historical irony. At the beginning of the 17th century, Elizabeth I was ailing, miserable and childless. Her heir was Jamie Sext, James VI of Scotland. But she was not prepared to anticipate her own mortality. Her first minister, Robert Cecil, later Earl of Salisbury, arranged matters in secret negotiations with Edinburgh. The succession proceeded smoothly, thus preparing the way for ultimate parliamentary union and for the greatness of the United Kingdom.
Four hundred years later, Robert Cecil’s descendant, Robert Salisbury, has come up with a radical proposal to preserve his ancestor’s handiwork. He argues that the UK must become a federation. England, Scotland, Wales and Ulster: each would have its own Parliament, in charge of all domestic issues, including welfare, plus income tax, though not VAT, which would remain a federal tax. The federal Parliament would replace the House of Lords. It would deal with foreign affairs, defence and monetary policy as well as some law and order issues.
Although the details would be complex, the principles underlying the Salisbury plan have the merit of clarity. But there would be political difficulties.
Wales: at the outset, and in a low turn-out, the Welsh electorate only just voted in favour of devolution in the late 1990s. The lethal mismanagement that the Welsh government has inflicted on the health service will not have increased public enthusiasm. Would Welsh voters want to reward failure with greatly enhanced scope for future failure?
Ulster: the political class enjoys playing at parliaments, with the resulting perquisites. But a majority of Unionist voters would prefer full integration with the UK and would be uneasy about any change that appeared to increase their separation from London.
England: some English voters might resent the need to make fundamental changes to placate those grievance-mongering Scots. Many others, especially Tories, would welcome the prospect of an English Parliament, especially if they thought it would bring the arguments to an end. But that would not happen.
Nothing short of full independence will satisfy the Nats, led by Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's First Minister
England, the only country in the UK still completely controlled by Westminster, would need its own parliament if the UK became a federal state
Scotland: the SNP would grab anything on offer, while demanding more and intensifying their programme of rolling blackmail. Nothing short of full independence will satisfy the Nats. In the meantime, they would use additional powers to highlight their differences from England, whatever the cost in misgovernment. In a federalised Scotland, the SNP would continue to undermine the education system while wrecking the Highlands and the Scottish economy. A broken Labour Party would offer no resistance. Indeed, Labour survivors would join the Nats in plundering the rest of Scotland to subsidise higher welfare payments in a de facto nationalist and socialist coalition. In the short term, all this might boost the English economy as businesses moved south and any Scots with get up and go, got up and went. But that would be a tragic end to the triumphs of Great Britain. All in all, federalism cannot be the answer because it cannot eliminate the Nationalist threat.
Fortunately, there is an alternative: a federal Scotland. Despite the Nats’ insistence that anyone who is not with them is against Scotland, the reality is much subtler. The Scottish national identity is a wonderful amalgam. There is Glasgow, but also Edinburgh, plus the Borders, the Highlands, the Islands. We have the East Coast and the West Coast; football Scotland, rugby Scotland; Catholic Scotland and Protestant Scotland. There is a glorious landscape, some almost equally glorious townscapes; it has a magnificent military tradition; a history with many sad passages and plenty of splendid ones. Such riches on all sides – anyone wishing to contemplate the kaleidoscope of the human condition could start in Scotland.
It would be absurd to allow the Nats to reject all aspects of this great nation that do not fit in to their narrow aims, and there is an alternative. Announce that in a future referendum any parts of Scotland that are contiguous to England and vote to stay in the UK will be permitted to do so. So would other Unionist regions large enough to be free-standing, while Orkney and Shetland could have Channel Isles status. At a stroke, this would crush any illusion that an independent Scotland could be economically viable.
Over the past few months, the Nats have had far too many concessions, far too much appeasement. It’s time for realism.
A way to save the Union from the cunning Nats - Telegraph
A way to save the Union from the cunning Nats
The Scots Nats are perpetual trouble-makers who will do anything and everything to aggravate the English. It's about time we turned the tables on them
It's time for a dose of realism about Scotland's future. Photo: Getty Images
By Bruce Anderson
21 Mar 2015
The Telegraph
The divergence is absolute and could prove fatal. In England, many voters are already bored with the election campaign, which has hardly begun. But large parts of North Britain are in the grip of religious mania. Scottish friends of mine, who thought that they understood their own country, now feel bewildered, marginalised – and threatened. The Scot Nats’ concept of Scotland is totalitarian. If you do not agree with them, you are no true Scot.
A year ago, phrases such as safe seat, rotten borough and Stalinist permafrost would have been inadequate to describe the Labour Party’s grip on Glasgow. For a generation, mediocrity had followed mediocrity, Tam McJimmy would be succeeded by Jimmy McTam, all members for Glasgow Glottal Stop, each as bad as the other. This seemed set to continue until the end of time. Now, Labour could be wiped out in Glasgow. The utterly incredible has been replaced by the almost inevitable.
The UK could become a federal state, with England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland each having its own Parliament, in charge of all domestic issues, including welfare, plus income tax. The federal Parliament would replace the House of Lords. It would deal with foreign affairs, defence and monetary policy as well as some law and order issues
Apropos of inevitability, and whatever the outcome in the rest of the UK, the next Parliament is bound to be disrupted by around 30 Scot Nats, intent on perpetual trouble-making. They will do anything and everything to provoke the English. In the 1880s, when the whole of the island of Ireland was within the United Kingdom, much of current parliamentary procedure was hurriedly improvised to deal with Parnell’s attempts to inflict mayhem on Westminster in order to further the cause of Irish nationalism. Within a few weeks, there will be a repetition.
Cunning Nats have always planned to irritate the English in order to convince them that Scotland is more trouble than it is worth. The Referendum campaign helped, because many English drew two conclusions. First, that the Scots had no legitimate grounds for complaint. Second, that they did not seem to like England and the English. Nat-induced chaos in Westminster will reinforce that impression.
So is there any way to save the Union? Let us start with a historical irony. At the beginning of the 17th century, Elizabeth I was ailing, miserable and childless. Her heir was Jamie Sext, James VI of Scotland. But she was not prepared to anticipate her own mortality. Her first minister, Robert Cecil, later Earl of Salisbury, arranged matters in secret negotiations with Edinburgh. The succession proceeded smoothly, thus preparing the way for ultimate parliamentary union and for the greatness of the United Kingdom.
Four hundred years later, Robert Cecil’s descendant, Robert Salisbury, has come up with a radical proposal to preserve his ancestor’s handiwork. He argues that the UK must become a federation. England, Scotland, Wales and Ulster: each would have its own Parliament, in charge of all domestic issues, including welfare, plus income tax, though not VAT, which would remain a federal tax. The federal Parliament would replace the House of Lords. It would deal with foreign affairs, defence and monetary policy as well as some law and order issues.
Although the details would be complex, the principles underlying the Salisbury plan have the merit of clarity. But there would be political difficulties.
Wales: at the outset, and in a low turn-out, the Welsh electorate only just voted in favour of devolution in the late 1990s. The lethal mismanagement that the Welsh government has inflicted on the health service will not have increased public enthusiasm. Would Welsh voters want to reward failure with greatly enhanced scope for future failure?
Ulster: the political class enjoys playing at parliaments, with the resulting perquisites. But a majority of Unionist voters would prefer full integration with the UK and would be uneasy about any change that appeared to increase their separation from London.
England: some English voters might resent the need to make fundamental changes to placate those grievance-mongering Scots. Many others, especially Tories, would welcome the prospect of an English Parliament, especially if they thought it would bring the arguments to an end. But that would not happen.
Nothing short of full independence will satisfy the Nats, led by Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's First Minister
England, the only country in the UK still completely controlled by Westminster, would need its own parliament if the UK became a federal state
Scotland: the SNP would grab anything on offer, while demanding more and intensifying their programme of rolling blackmail. Nothing short of full independence will satisfy the Nats. In the meantime, they would use additional powers to highlight their differences from England, whatever the cost in misgovernment. In a federalised Scotland, the SNP would continue to undermine the education system while wrecking the Highlands and the Scottish economy. A broken Labour Party would offer no resistance. Indeed, Labour survivors would join the Nats in plundering the rest of Scotland to subsidise higher welfare payments in a de facto nationalist and socialist coalition. In the short term, all this might boost the English economy as businesses moved south and any Scots with get up and go, got up and went. But that would be a tragic end to the triumphs of Great Britain. All in all, federalism cannot be the answer because it cannot eliminate the Nationalist threat.
Fortunately, there is an alternative: a federal Scotland. Despite the Nats’ insistence that anyone who is not with them is against Scotland, the reality is much subtler. The Scottish national identity is a wonderful amalgam. There is Glasgow, but also Edinburgh, plus the Borders, the Highlands, the Islands. We have the East Coast and the West Coast; football Scotland, rugby Scotland; Catholic Scotland and Protestant Scotland. There is a glorious landscape, some almost equally glorious townscapes; it has a magnificent military tradition; a history with many sad passages and plenty of splendid ones. Such riches on all sides – anyone wishing to contemplate the kaleidoscope of the human condition could start in Scotland.
It would be absurd to allow the Nats to reject all aspects of this great nation that do not fit in to their narrow aims, and there is an alternative. Announce that in a future referendum any parts of Scotland that are contiguous to England and vote to stay in the UK will be permitted to do so. So would other Unionist regions large enough to be free-standing, while Orkney and Shetland could have Channel Isles status. At a stroke, this would crush any illusion that an independent Scotland could be economically viable.
Over the past few months, the Nats have had far too many concessions, far too much appeasement. It’s time for realism.
A way to save the Union from the cunning Nats - Telegraph
Last edited:
