If Scotland is so poor, why does Westminster resist independence?
In 2010, when the Tories came to power, the debt was £1.3 trillion. Under their governance, it's now reached well north of £2 trillion, despite the years of austerity that decimated our public services and which may take a generation or more to repair.
WATCH: Expert debunks everything you've been told about Scottish 'deficit'
Westminster has trashed the economy and then has the temerity to apportion 'our share' of that debt accrued to we Scots who had no influence in its creation. We Scots are paying for vanity projects we can never benefit from, nor do we have any influence over the political choices that waste money wholesale across the economy, while having also to bear continually higher interest rates, low wages, energy poverty and housing crises.
GERS is a manufactured illusion designed to portray Scotland as bad and weak. This is the same bad and weak Scotland that English-dominated Westminster is desperate to hold on to. Why? Because we know they have long taken Scotland's resources and poured them into the UK financial cesspit to prop it up, and fully intend to do so going forward. It's they who can't afford Scotland's independence, not us. Common sense reveals that if these GERS figures were correct, Scotland would be independent by now, and Westminster would be driving it.
READ MORE: Scottish Secretary Ian Murray reacts to latest GERS figures
Independent, with full political and economic control, we could divest ourselves of the UK's sick economy of Europe that's long lived off its size and reputation rather than ability and strength, and build a stronger future for our descendants.
Independence now is our imperative. Don't we urgently need an indy road map drawn with courage and determination rather than a seemingly cosy wee 'vote for us and we'll see what we can do' promise with the indy can kicked farther down the road?
Jim Taylor
Scotland
THERE has been a significant increase in the number of people complaining about various plans or the lack of. Each inventor assumes that their specific plan is infallible and can produce the outcome we all seek. This is putting the cart before the horse.
The problem most authors make is to not take account of the forces arrayed against us or the practical realities of plans being implemented. In most cases we probably need a combination of plans rather than just one. The circumstances at the time will dictate which plan or plans can or cannot be used.
Creating plans is valid, and each of them goes on a shelf ready to be used when the time and circumstances are appropriate, as with preparing for contingencies like defence or pandemics. None of them have on their own any degree of certainty, and it remains essential that flexibility in argument and implementation is maintained.
READ MORE: GERS figures show Scottish Government revenue growing faster than spending
Fundamentally though, the prerequisite for pursuing any of the plans is a reliable majority of voters to start the process off. We can have as many plans as we like, but without that recognisable majority none of them can ever get off the ground.
None of the plans actually recognises the need to convince people, probably because the only people who devise them speak to the already converted. If that enthusiasm and dedication were directed at those who are not converted, we would stand a much better chance of success. Internal arguments about plans get in the way of the primary need to convince a solid and consistent majority.
Without that majority support, it doesn't matter whether it is Alex Salmond's ghost, John Swinney, Kenny MacAskill or somebody else leading the charge with whichever masterful plan is valid at the time. Arguing about who has the best and infallible plan is a futile waste of time and effort.
Nick Cole
Meigle, Perthshire
OH how I really wish I shared Stan Grodynski's optimistic attitude to the leadership of the SNP in his recent letter headed 'An emphatic win for the SNP will mean no excuses for inaction' (Aug 13).
I assume to help achieve this 'emphatic win' independence supporters will be asked to vote SNP on both ballot papers in May 2026. That election is now less than nine months away. A week is indeed a long time in politics, but my gut feeling is that we are heading for a result, at best, similar to the 2021 election – the SNP as the largest party but without an overall majority and another coalition with the Greens a very distinct and unfortunate possibility.
READ MORE: The two plans for achieving independence are surely not incompatible
I see little current evidence that Alba or any other of the small parties which support independence will reach the threshold required to turn list votes into list seats. To do so now would need the SNP to approve of their supporters voting for another independence-supporting party on the list. I see no chance of that happening any time soon.
In addition, a potentially lacklustre and possibly poorly financed SNP campaign will see hundreds of thousands of independence supporters simply staying at home. The million or so SNP supporters who do vote may see their list votes result in a few extra SNP and Green candidates elected while the Unionist parties, now including Reform UK, will fill up the remaining large number of available list seats. It will be Groundhog Day – May 2021 all over again.
If the SNP do really well and achieve a majority of MSPs, sadly I fear post-May 2026 there may suddenly appear a vast myriad of 'excuses for inaction'. The most obvious of which will be 'Keir Starmer just telt us NO'. The political ball will then be firmly bounced back into the SNP's court. The new SNP leader (assuming John Swinney has left the post) will have to decide on some very uncharacteristic radical action or meekly accept five more years of Donald Dewar devolution.
Brian Lawson
Paisley
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
17 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Large drop in number of pupils studying Welsh at A-level since 2005, data shows
More than 500 fewer students studied Welsh to a high level this year than in 2005, the latest data shows. The drop has come despite the Welsh Government having set a target of one million Welsh speakers by 2050. Around 538,000 people can speak the language in Wales. Data examined by the PA news agency shows some 372 students took Welsh as a first or second language at A-level this year, down from 927 in 2005. The lowest year on record was 2023, when just 353 pupils took the subject. This year has been the lowest year for people taking Welsh as a first language, with 185 entries, compared with 260 in 2020. Some 187 pupils took the subject as a second language, with 209 having taken it in 2020. Efa Gruffudd Jones, the Welsh Language Commissioner – an officer appointed by the Welsh Government to oversee an independent body aiming to promote the use of the Welsh language – described the drop as a 'matter of concern'. Speaking to PA, Ms Gruffudd Jones said she supported calls from the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol (Welsh National College) for Welsh to become a protected subject. She said: '(This would) make sure that every educational institution post-16 offers the course. 'What I hear from people who get in touch with my office, if only you know three or four people want to study it, then schools don't offer the subject at all. 'I believe they need 12 before they decide to run the course. I don't think that's right. 'I think it should be offered at every educational institution post-16.' Ms Gruffudd Jones also said the qualification itself is under review, and the content needs to be made more attractive and relevant to students. She added: 'The other thing is that you can study many more courses through the medium of Welsh now than you used to be able to. 'You can study psychology, criminology, etc, through the medium of Welsh. 'Maybe people in the past who would have wanted to study through the medium of Welsh chose Welsh, but now they have a wider range of choice.' The commissioner stressed that Welsh is not the only language to have seen a decline, with many European languages having seen a drop across the UK. Total entries for French, German, and Spanish were down by 20% from 443 to 352 in Wales this year, with Ruth Cocks, director of British Council Wales, describing the drop in interest in international languages as a 'concerning story'. Ms Gruffudd Jones said the reason for the move away from studying languages was unclear, but may be due to pupils being encouraged to study more Stem subjects. 'I understand that we need people with technical ability, but I would argue that you also need linguistic ability in order to communicate with people in workplaces, to articulate yourself well in future,' she said. 'I would argue that literature gives you some insight into the world. 'I don't think really that it should be either or. 'What's important is that it doesn't go any lower, and we continue to make efforts to attract people to learn Welsh to a high standard.' The Welsh Government's aim to have one million Welsh speakers by 2050 was first set out in 2017. Earlier this year, a new five-year plan was unveiled by the commissioner to help achieve the goal. And the Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Bill, which aims to close the gap in Welsh speaking ability among pupils from different schools, passed in the Senedd. Figures from the 2021 census showed a decline in the number of people who can speak Welsh compared with a decade earlier. Around 538,000 people in Wales – roughly 17% of the population – said they could speak Welsh, compared with 562,000 in 2011, around 19% of the population. Recent years have seen Welsh place names take prominence over English as the default, with Eryri replacing Snowdonia on official communications from the national park authority. In response to the decline in A-level entries, a Welsh Government spokesperson said: 'We would like more learners to take Welsh as a subject. 'A consultation is taking place to look at creating new Welsh AS and A-levels, making them engaging and attractive to learners. 'We see the Welsh Language and Education (Wales) Act 2025 as a means to provide more children and young people with access to the language within the education sector than ever before. 'We want all young people to leave school with better Welsh skills, regardless of whether they do A-level Welsh or not.'
The Herald Scotland
35 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
JK Rowling was wrong to label Sturgeon a 'destroyer of women's rights'
Depressingly, it echoed the trans activists' habit of framing this debate as a zero-sum game, where one side's victory entails the other's destruction, when a more constructive tone was plainly required. Sturgeon was already being personally targeted over self-ID by other politicians, but Rowling's actions ratcheted up the pressure to another level. Whether it marked the moment 'rational debate' became 'impossible', as Sturgeon claims, is more contestable, but it almost certainly made the debate more toxic. Then again, I thought exactly the same about Nicola Sturgeon's own comments, when she linked concerns around self-ID to transphobia in an apparent attempt to discredit critics. Read more In one interview I saw at the height of the controversy, she was asked about women's worries around gender reforms. She claimed that of course the Scottish Government took women's concerns seriously, but then insisted fiercely and pointedly that there was a great deal of transphobia in the debate. Stressing transphobia when asked about women's concerns became the standard Scottish government response, not just from Sturgeon but from other ministers like Patrick Harvie. It seemed like an unambiguous attempt to smear their opponents. As someone who had often agreed with Sturgeon, I was taken aback. There are transphobes in the debate, as we can see more clearly now than ever – and misogynists on the other side too – but the repeated emphasis ministers put on this point did an injustice to the majority whose views were motivated by concern for women's rights. Like Rowling's T-shirt, it just further poisoned the climate. Did Nicola Sturgeon really take women's concerns seriously? She had by then already made clear her lack of sympathy with those objections, saying they were 'not valid' and insisting rather patronisingly that campaigners should focus on the 'real threat' to women – 'abusive and predatory men' – instead of trans people. She studiously ignored what deep down she must have known: that it was precisely those 'abusive and predatory men' that women's campaigners were most concerned about. The Scottish Government was backing a gender ideology that was much contested but relentlessly enforced by an activist community online and in person. Women had been hounded out of their jobs simply for dissenting from the orthodoxy. Those who disagreed that a trans woman and a woman were one and the same, or questioned someone's gender identity, were and still are framed as bigots and liable to find themselves and their employers the target of public campaigns of humiliation. In that climate, it would take a brave person to challenge someone's claim to be female in a women's only space. How, with a government that appeared to back gender ideology wholesale, could women's only spaces possibly be policed to keep out bad actors? Sturgeon seemed oblivious to these concerns. SNP MSPs even voted against an amendment by one of their own colleagues which would have halted the granting of a gender recognition certificate to rapists. Liberalism is not about placing the rights of one discriminated against group above that of another; it's about balancing interests fairly. This felt like the politics of the far left. Ultimately it was the controversy around Isla Bryson – who as Adam Graham had been charged with two counts of rape before declaring himself female and being remanded in a women's prison – that decisively destroyed trust in the Scottish Government's reassurances that gender self-ID was wholly benign. So yes, Nicola Sturgeon, like JK Rowling, has poured petrol on the flames. But, credit where it's due, she has also now held up her hands to being part of the problem. She told ITV: 'We'd lost all sense of rationality in this debate. I'm partly responsible for that.' She has also said that she wishes she'd paused the gender recognition act legislation to find consensus. Nicola Sturgeon has reignited the row (Image: PA) In their different ways, Nicola Sturgeon and JK Rowling have both tried to stand up for a vulnerable group, but we have watched them become increasingly radical, probably as a consequence of having to defend themselves constantly against those who monster them. They exist, as we all do, in a truly horrible climate of so-called debate. Rowling was accused without evidence of transphobia from the first moment she dared raise her head above the parapet, and has been on the receiving end of death and rape threats since. These days she seems less measured. She's described the nurse Sandie Peggie, no poster girl for tolerance, as a 'heroine'. She has continued to attack Sturgeon. Sturgeon for her part became more intransigent as opposition to her position on trans rights increased, closing her ears to pleas to moderate her approach. It did not help either women or trans people. Many trans people now feel they are in a worse position than before Sturgeon's attempt at gender recognition reform. Both women have gone too far. Both women bear some responsibility for the bitterness of the debate. But both women could also be part of a reset, if they chose to be. Arguably, Sturgeon is showing a willingness to try. It would take a dramatic change of tone and approach, but God knows, it's needed. Rebecca McQuillan is a journalist specialising in politics and Scottish affairs. She can be found on Bluesky at @ and on X at @BecMcQ
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Japan's economy expands annualised 1.0% in April-June
TOKYO, Aug 15 (Reuters) - Japan's economy expanded an annualised 1.0% in the April-June quarter, government data showed on Friday, compared with a median market forecast for a 0.4% increase. The rise in gross domestic product (GDP) translated into a quarterly increase of 0.3%, compared with a median estimate of a 0.1% increase.
