Connery banned from voting
SNP has set a potential trap as it makes its orderly retreat
See also:
'Yes-Yes' for choosing Scotland's future
SNP - 25th Februarty 2010
Plans to give the people of Scotland their say on the nation's future – including enhanced devolution, and extending the powers of the Parliament to enable independence to be achieved – were unveiled today with the publication of a draft Referendum Bill. - Scotland's Future [ 1280KB PDF]
First Minister Alex Salmond published the draft Bill, which would give people the opportunity to have their say on two questions: first, whether the Scottish Parliament should have more devolved responsibility; and second, whether there should be an additional extension of power to enable Scotland to become an independent country.
A consultation paper, published with the draft Bill, seeks views on the best option for the question on further devolution: full devolution including fiscal autonomy (known as 'Devo Max'), or the more limited proposals made by the Commission on Scottish Devolution (the 'Calman Commission').
The SNP leader said: “Through our ground-breaking National Conversation, involving the voluntary sector, trades unions, business and local communities – and the White Paper, 'Your Scotland, Your Voice' published on St Andrew's Day last year – we have provided a comprehensive platform for all the options for Scotland's constitutional future.
“The Scottish Government believe in the sovereignty of the people. And as set out in the manifesto on which we were elected, we are committed to giving people the opportunity to express their views in a referendum.
“The importance of referendums on constitutional matters across the UK is clear, with the National Assembly for Wales having voted unanimously for a referendum to extend its powers, and Westminster backing a referendum on reforming the electoral system. There is no reason why Scotland should be treated differently, or less democratically.
“More than 10 years on from the establishment of the Scottish Parliament, the debate in Scotland is no longer about whether or not the Parliament should take on new responsibilities – it is about the form of change, and that issue underpins the consultation. The people want our Parliament to be able to do more, so the debate is now about how much more. And it is time the people had their say.
“I believe that the future prosperity and development of our country is best served by Scotland becoming independent, and the Scottish Government would campaign for a 'Yes-Yes' vote in the referendum – 'yes' to more responsibilities for the Parliament, and 'yes' to additional powers to enable independence to be achieved. “'Yes-Yes' was the winning campaign in 1997 – and will be a winning campaign for Scotland again.
“The case for an independent Scotland is stronger and more urgent following the economic crisis. It is exactly the powers and flexibility offered by independence that Scotland needs in order to support recovery now, and deal effectively with the challenges and opportunities of the future. But I recognise that there are also those who argue that the responsibilities of the Scottish Parliament should be extended in more limited ways.
“The draft Bill reflects that and provides the framework for a referendum shaped by the people of Scotland. I look forward to the consultation, the debate on the Bill – and to campaigning for a 'Yes-Yes' vote in the referendum itself.”
Salmond abandons complex plan for independence vote
Dean Herbert - Daily Express - February 26,2010
Alex Salmond was last night accused of another U-turn after dropping plans to win independence by the back door.
The First Minister had suggested that Scotland’s future could be decided using a “preference voting” system for three constitutional options. However, critics claimed the move would split the electorate and take the country out of the UK without a clear majority.
And yesterday the controversial proposals were dumped for the SNP’s leader’s draft Referendum Bill, which said it was “too complicated”.
It is the latest climb-down from Mr Salmond within a month, after he was forced to downgrade the Bill to a consultation, so avoiding it being sunk by opposition MSPs before it could reach Parliament.
Instead of three choices, voters would be asked to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on whether they support the Scottish Parliament being given new devolved powers plus one other as yet undecided.
The consultation paper offers two alternatives for this question, one based on the so-called “devolution max” option of giving Holyrood control of everything except defence, foreign affairs and financial regulation, and another based on the more limited powers outlined by the Calman Commission.
The draft Bill also revealed that the cost of holding a referendum would be about £9.5million and that Scots as young as 16 would be allowed to vote.
Mr Salmond yesterday said he would be campaigning for a yes, yes vote whatever the first question but critics said he should be concentrating on the economy.
In Glasgow, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Mr Salmond was “wasting time and resources on the dogmatic obsession of breaking up Britain instead of securing the recovery and protecting jobs”.
He added: “What people are thinking about is jobs, the health service, about education and schools and they want to hold the SNP to account for what they have done in the Scottish Parliament. “There is a time to deal with constitutional issues but it is not now.”
Iain Gray, the Scottish Labour leader, dismissed the draft Bill as a “doomed vanity project”.
Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott accused Mr Salmond of getting his priorities wrong, adding “As always the SNP puts the politics of narrow nationalism ahead of the interests of Scotland.”
Tory leader Annabel Goldie said Mr Salmond should “ditch this Bill, stop wasting taxpayers’ time and money and get on with what he was elected to do – namely helping the country deal with the legacy of Labour’s debt crisis.”
But Mr Salmond insisted: “It is exactly the powers and flexibility offered by independence that Scotland needs in order to support recovery now, and deal effectively with the challenges and opportunities of the future.”
Connery banned from voting
Ines Watson - Express - 26th February 2010
Staunch
Nationalist Sir Sean Connery would be barred from bankrolling
the SNP’s campaign for independence under strict rules set out in the
Referendum Bill.The Edinburgh-born film legend would also be prevented from voting in favour of a split from the UK under rules banning non-residents. Bahamas-based tax exile Sir Sean, 79, has long supported the SNP financially.
The Bill spells out strict rules set out by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act, stating that participants “cannot accept anonymous donations or donations from individuals or organisations from outside the UK”.
It also states it would only permit servicemen registered to vote in Scotland to take part.
SNP has set a potential trap as it makes its orderly retreat
John Curtis - Scotsman - 26th february 2010
On coming to power in 2007, the first SNP government had a clear central purpose. On St Andrew's Day, 2010, it would crown its time in office by giving the Scottish public the chance to vote for the party's cause célèbre – independence.
But now, nearly three years later, what do we have? Not a real referendum bill, just a draft one. Is it for a vote about independence? Well, yes… but it offers the prospect of a vote on the opposition's preferred policy too – with the First Minister campaigning in favour.
Will it be implemented any time soon? Certainly not before May 2011 – even if Mr Salmond can eventually find the votes to get his bill passed. It would appear the independence project is running into the sand. History's judgment on Mr Salmond's administration is seemingly destined to be "a government that failed to deliver".
But if the publication of the draft bill represents a retreat by the SNP, it is at least an orderly one. It leaves open the prospect, however remote, that a bill will eventually be passed. And it contains the potential to embarrass the opposition.
Mr Salmond's hopes of being able to hold a referendum have always rested on persuading the Liberal Democrats to come alongside.
The Lib Dems may not want independence, but they do want a stronger Scottish Parliament. Maybe they could be persuaded to back a multi-option referendum on strengthening devolution as well as independence. However, the Lib Dems decided to play a different game – to try, via the Calman Commission, to persuade Labour and the Conservatives to back giving the Scottish Parliament greater fiscal powers.
In this, they have largely been successful. But Labour's proposed timetable for implementing Calman is slow, while the Conservatives want to look at the details again. Calman may yet still fail to realise the Liberal Democrats' hopes.
Meanwhile, a potential trap has been laid for both Labour and the Conservatives. Suppose the SNP eventually makes Calman, rather than "devolution max", the proposal to be voted on together with independence. Imagine the opposition then votes the bill down. The result would be deeply ironic. The opposition would have voted down the chance to hold a referendum on a policy they themselves favour – whereas the SNP would have given the public its say.
That could prove a rather difficult stance to defend.
John Curtice is professor of politics at
Strathclyde University in
Glasgow.
See also:
Scotland's Future [ 1280KB PDF]
Suggestions for ballot questions [ 135KB PDF]
Scottish Independence must come
Your Scotland Your Voice: A National Conversation [ 4298KB PDF]
It's Scotland's oil
Uganda: When Amin Was Declared 'King of Scotland' in 1974
|
Readers please email comments
to: editorial AT martinfrost.ws including
full name
Return to Home Page |
||
| Note: martinfrost.ws contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner. |