I was tempted to write a blog entitled ‘I don't know' this morning. There were, and are, good grounds for doing so. No one does know what might happen in the UK's fevered political scene: the possible options are too varied to be sure.
And yet, that claim would also be untrue in some ways. There are some things we do know.
As a matter of fact about one third of the UK remains Tory, come what may. Whether that is hard to understand because the party appears so far removed from the one its current supporters used to vote for does not matter. For most of them the only alternative is the Brexit Party. They can dismiss any suggestion that they are extremist by suggesting there is something worse. And like it or not, hard Brexit is now what most of them want, whether they could explain why or not.
And I think it probably a fact that at present support for Labour is less than it is for the Tories, whilst the LibDems are doing better than they dared hope at any time recently, even if their vote is heavily boosted by Remainers suggesting that they will vote tactically.
These are close to facts.
And the fact is that this delivers a political mess. They suggest that we may get a Tory majority, which would be dire for the UK. And we may get a hung parliament when the seemingly inevitable election happens, and the outcome of that is far from predictable.
So I am back to not knowing.
Except for this. 200,000 people marched for Scottish independence in the streets of Edinburgh yesterday. Search the English press online and there will be little or no hint of it. But that was 3.7% of the Scottish population. Anything much above 3% is considered a tipping point on such issues. Proportionately this was likely to have been bigger than the demonstrations against Blair's Iraq was. And that is a sure sign that come what may Scotland has little overall desire to stay in the Union. I happen to think it, and Northern Ireland, will leave.
I stress, I do not know. But I know that the probability is growing.Right now, that's as close to certainty as anyone can get.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Bring it on, and if anyone wants to escape the madcap politics of Westminster come on up – the kettles on!
I fully realise that BREXIT is the context that is creating this sort of reaction (and others).
The fight against BREXIT creates a ‘digging in’ mentality in the Tories and the party it gave birth to.
The referendum mentality means that some Labour MPs (and others) have forgotten what representative democracy actually is.
Whatever party they are part of however (1) their blind acceptance of the result of a very illegitimate process and (2) their rampant inability to work together because of intra-party fall outs and personality clashes to prevent a No Deal marks them down as particularly poor representatives of the people.
It means that literally democracy of such poor quality cannot be defended. It is hard to say but the Scots you are mentioning above have had enough and want to vote with their feet. I can’t blame them at all.
Who wouldn’t (Remain or Leaver) want to get into Parliament and bang some of those mollycoddled heads together?
But the MPs hold the key to this in my view but they keep dropping it. I may sound like a member of the ERG when I say this but Parliament is really quite hopeless at the moment. Legally banning a No Deal sounds really impressive but all it does is return us back to where we are already.
BREXIT will not go away until Parliament on behalf of the country makes it either go away (yes please) or at least gets a deal.
@Pilgrim
“Legally banning a No Deal sounds really impressive but all it does is return us back to where we are already.”
Hmmmm… if, as we suspect, Brexit represents standing on a cliff edge, staying where you are is a good tactic.
What is absent is a strategy for ‘going forward’ in another more fruitful direction. The options are to go left or right, both literally, in the analogy, or metaphorically, in political terms, in reality.
My view is that until it is cogently described, neither option will win majority support. We can’t just ‘go back’ and pretend the past three years didn’t happen, but nobody (of sufficient influence and charisma) is telling the story of where we could be going. (Hint: A Green New Deal is not a bad idea)
Scots are increasingly convinced they can do better under their own steam, and Ireland will reunite, but is not quite ready to take that step. England is in two minds neither of which has much clarity of vision. Or so it seems to me.
Brexit produces a conundrum. Fantasy (high risk) future versus boring-old where-we-were. Except it won’t be where we were, because the world has turned a few revolutions while England has been engaged in a crisis of navel gazing. A great deal of trust has been squandered both abroad and at home.
Both the Graun and Indy have stories, but they just say ‘thousands’ and the stories are almost identical. Yesterday the Graun hid it in their Scotland section (nested in UK news) but it’s now on the front page.
Sturgeon’s yet again no-show is getting tedious. Scared of the hard question of why we can’t have a formal campaign now on what they tell us is the definite indyref of some sort next year.
Without a formally declared campaign folk won’t come out to help and doors will not open to us. Last time there were people who wouldn’t engage until only 3months to go.
The Rev Stu on Wings has a poll and first released results show 90% of SNP supporters will vote for Independence. This might not seem surprising but last time only 75% did . People vote SNP for their domestic policies and followthrough despite the indy stuff.
Just like there are still Labour voters in Scotland who will both vote Labour and Independence.
The overall numbers for Yes won’t change significantly either without a campaign or Brexit actually happening. Remember folks, last time we moved the polls from 30% to 51% with two weeks to go triggering the infamous Vow breaking purdah. We can do that again. But we need a formal campaign.
I keep getting emails supposedly from the First Minister and I reply making similar points. To no effect. It is getting tedious. Throw us a bone please Ms Sturgeon or we might just choose a different Indy vehicle such as the Greens or the mooted Wings party. Support is conditional on progress towards independence.
Instead they are focussed on stopping Brexit. Except the English want Brexit and voted for it and polls still show an English majority for it. We should let them go there, just without us. Otherwise we are just frustrating their democratic wishes just like No10 is frustrating ours by not letting us have a Section 30 order.
To Englsh Brexiters who see this don’t worry plenty of us up here see it too. You Brexit if you want to, just let our people go. We’ll still be the best of friends after. We’ll vote for you on Eurovision (after the Irish, but still).
What is all of this about Peter?
The birth of Scottish exceptionalism is it? If Scotland is better, then exceptionalism shouldn’t be seen nor tolerated. You don’t want to end up like us do you?
Let’s just remember that 37% of the population voted for Leave. Not even half.
Around 150,000 Tory members voted for Boris (but actually voted for the ERG and Dominic Cummings) who went on to suspend Parliament.
Who did you say wants to leave the EU in England?? Certainly not I and many others too.
Whether you like it or not, we are somehow bound to together for now even if what has happened south of the border is an affront to democracy. There is no ditch like the English Channel or Irish Sea between Scotland and Wales, so no psychology to follow on either and no buffer zone – the action of a resulting BREXIT will be close up and personal.
Stopping BREXIT is pertinent to Scotland because it might hurt you too Peter. Even if done well, there are still going to be some rough times.
It’s not whether you go or not Peter; It’s how you go and what are you going into if you do? The SNP (like it could be argued) the ERG and the BREXIT party all have a strong nationalist instincts – sure. And in the UK, Boris and Co would be happy to sell us to the Americans or anyone on the cheap.
In Scotland, you already have Trump amongst you – trashing some protected dunes for his golf course in Aberdeenshire I see involving an SNP First Minister as he was:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/28/dunes-at-trump-golf-course-in-scotland-to-lose-protected-status
So, are your politics that different Scotland? Are you that special? Are Scot’s politicians more ‘moral’, wise and pragmatic? And kind. And fair? Humane even? Has Scottish politics emerged unscathed from years of association with the toxic politics of Olde England? Oooh they’d better have. They’d better be.
Who’s to say that the SNP won’t become too atavistic and won’t listen to good advice and before you know it yes – you’ll be independent but you’re selling your assets to the private sector with SNP MPs (yes, SNP MPs ) being elected on their private management boards on nice little retainers like their English counterparts? Is it that the Scottish gripe is that it should be only Scottish noses in the troughs rather than English ones? Fair enough – but which Scottish noses eh? The Nation’ s Nose – or only those who have been anointed in the Scottish parliament and Scottish Establishment? Is the objection to English cruelty like austerity and universal credit only that it is not Scottish cruelty?
Scottish history is full of betrayal from within. It would be sad to see this again in your future.
Whatever happens, my recommendation to you is to grow some eyes in the back of your head Peter laddie – and right quick- cos’ you’re going to need them.
There is no guarantee that I can see that what has happened to English polity won’t happen to the Scottish. Keep those eyes peeled and your feet on the ground. You could go the same way as us at any time. You’ve been warned.
If Scotland ends up with a bunch of charlatans in government it will because Scotland elected them and not because our next door neighbour did.
Slainte!
🙂
Professor Murphy,
As ever thank you for your thoughtful comments. I just want to enter a slight caveat to this particular blog however. I was on the AUOB march in Edinburgh and it certainly was massive. However all the figures of 200k plus marchers that I have seen have come from AUOB. Interestingly neither the police nor Edinburgh Council were able to provide estimates (at least the last time I looked). So I think 200k plus should be taken with a pinch of salt even though I think there were at least as many there as there were at the Glasgow march earlier in the year.
Richard do you think the fact that 1950s women (of which I am one lost their court case against the pension rise will have any impact on the tory vote. Normally many would be tory voters but I am now seeing on the pension groups that these women and in many cases their husbands and families will vote against tories.
I’m in Scotland so this won’t affect the way I vote but If Labour come out with a concrete proposal instead of their wish wash it may well influence a huge proportion of them.
I think it will
Will that be enough? I do not know….
Lorna, I notice the court case was lost this week, I also noticed the lack of media coverage – there should have been outrage – especially at the judge’s comments on his reasoning for throwing it out ‘historic discrimination against men’ – I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. Historic discrimination? Where all women have only recently been allowed to vote the same as men, where married women have only even more recently been allowed by law to have independent bank accounts, insurance, or, yes, pensions. Poor him all discriminated against. Historic discrimination my arse.
I am ‘lucky’ to be in the next generation – plenty of notice of my pension age going from 60 to 65,,, um, now 68 apparently. But I really feel for the women who have been royally screwed by the government over this, and angry.
Pensions are huge Richard, no one wants to find themselves floundering in penury after a lifetime of work after being promised otherwise. And our pensions are tiny compared with other EU countries, apparently. Any party that promises absolutely fair pension and fair pension age will get a large boost to votes. I can’t tell if that would overcome people’s brexit obsession though.
Pensions are huge as an issue
I know
I am 61…..
I may have no plans to retire any time soon but I know those who do
I was at a Waspi event attended by our MP on Saturday evening.
He told me his understanding was that many MPs he’d spoken to after the ruling came through thought their party would include provision to compensate 1950s women in some way or other, to some degree or other, in their manifestos….this was from across the political range. It seems fair.
At least the case brought to the High Court by the “Back to 60” group had the merit of raising the issue’s profile a little.
So expect promises. Lots of them.
But who will you trust to deliver?
Campaigning must go on meanwhile, the High Court judges were careless saying that there was no obligation for the government to inform us individually about changes. It sets a precedent for all sorts of abuse.
Our Waspi group has a slightly different name to the national one, the “i ” stands for injustice, not for inequality.
We do campaign for equality on equal grounds…which some of the 1950s women certainly didn’t have at the start of their careers.
The cases I’ve looked at were a real eye opener, I’m one of the lucky ones, so haven’t felt the full impact of that injustice, but I have a duty of solidarity.
Most of us won’t vote Tory, but some will…some are even Brexiters!
Meetings can get…interesting.
Oh well, I see them as opportunities to turn a few.
Two campaigns for the price of one, what’s not to like! 😉
Good luck
William Keegan appears to get it right in his Observer/Guardian article today when he suggests the country is no longer the United Kingdom but the United Kindergarten because of Brexit:-
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/06/brexit-only-belongs-lawless-party-law-order-national-interest
His comment is an indirect way of saying a people get the government they deserve or education is the safe-guarder of democracy.
It’s not looking good for the UK and dissolution of the “union” increasingly on the cards!
I liked the suggestion
Yes, but. I do not think there is the remotest possibility that any Westminster regime will grant the section 30 order to permit a referendum on Scottish independence. Why should they? We only got one last time because independence was 25% in most polls. Without a section 30 order there is no legal way of leaving.
This will end badly.
That’s not true in international law
That is UK law which may be inapplicable here
Hmm. Another yes, but. I believe we need to leave in a way recognised by the Westminster parliament, in order to join the United Nations without a fuss, apply to join the EU, and sell the nuclear submarine fleet to the Iranians, ok we won’t do that last bit. If we hold any form of election for Independence without Westminster’s approval, the forces of Unionism in Scotland will boycott the vote, and claim illegitimacy. Too messy.
See Ken’s post
I agree it’s UK law, but on the basis that NO London Govt. will even grant a new s30, what exactly does the SNP (and the wider YES movement) actually do next? I assume a court case, but why hasn’t this been tested before now? I think it’s these kind of issue that are exercising the patience of Independence supporters.
See what Ken wrote….I think he is right
David,
For a detailed description of what the Scotland Act says and what a S30 order does try this:
https://peterabell.scot/2019/07/30/section-30-is-not-scotlands-salvation/
I agree that it’s highly unlikely that Boris would facilitate a referendum on Scottish Independence, but in the absence of a written Constitution for the UK, precedent is what the law relies on and the 2014 Edinburgh Agreement is the most recent and relevant precedent. For that reason, we have to go through the process of applying for a S30 transfer of powers to Holyrood and being refused before we can progress towards an alternative and legitimate secession as defined in International Law.
Before we can do this, we have to demonstrate that the majority of Scots residents are in favour of independence. There are various possibilities for this but the most undeniably democratic one is a properly run referendum that meets international standards. If that is achieved(with or without a S30 Order), International Law will recognise our right to invoke the rights of self-determination enshrined in the United Nations Charter (the above link to Peter A Bell’s blog also quotes the relevant passage of the UN Charter as well as citing statements by the UK Gov relating to it). The 1975 Helsinki Conference of European nations states similar rights in Principle VIII, but I can’t locate the link where I found it (Google is your friend!).
I understand the frustration of the Indy supporters that the pace of progress is slow, but that is partly down to the very different personalities of Salmond and Sturgeon. Salmond could never resist publicity and would give away strategies before discussions took place just to get an eye-catching headline (cf the 2014 confusion over currency and monetary policy). In contrast, Sturgeon is a more cautious politician who is prepared to play a longer game to ensure a win. I’d rather have a more guarded and consistent approach than the whizz-bang approach as it’s more likely to yield the result we seek.
You state “without a section 30 order there is no legal way of leaving”, but there is if we follow the International Law route. The S30 charade is simply a means of demonstrating that the UK is not prepared to allow the Scots to make a decision about our preferred form of governance and, by so doing, establishes that we have a de facto right to seek a remedy under International Law.
I knew I had read this somewhere
Thanks Ken
I support the rights of Scots, Irish, English and Welsh peoples to determine their own future. In fact all peoples have this right under international law. TheCatalan people have this right. The Spanish government squashed them when they tried to exercise it and still keep hundreds in jail pending trial. The Spanish have been fully supported in this approach by the EU. What makes you Richard and anyone else think the elites approach to Scotland will be any different to Catalonia?
The fact that Scotland is still recognised as a nation
True the Scots are a nation. But so are the Catalans as upheld by the Spanish constitutional court in 2010. My point is that in these days when US and UK flout international law so blatantly and the EU is no guarantor of democratic rights, for the Scots to think getting their own state is likely seems inherently unlikely to me whatever the merits of their case.
I have to hope…
On numbers: there seems to be the strangest problem with estimating the number of attendees at any independence march, estimates have always varied wildly from 300 to 100000, with any number in between being given. No other rally I know of has such difficulty of people agreeing a roundabout figure. I suspect the police and council have decided to keep out of this one because of the arguments, so 200 000 it is. Which is ‘thousands’, so possibly ‘accurate’ reporting does not quite reach the full extent, but cannot be called out. The purpose of making up random numbers is just interference, to cause confusion and uncertainty, and, obviously, to prevent the public from knowing how popular independence actually is, and how acceptable it is to discuss it.
On the SNP over-focusing on Brexit: as part of the Union, which we are, we vote for the SNP to represent us at Westminster, and their representation is based on our preferences, and in the case of the EU referendum, that was to remain in the EU. By voting for people to represent us in Westminster, we accept they have to obey the rules of that system, and if we didn’t want representatives that support the Scottish people we would have carried on voting for Labour and Conservative lickspittle lackies that just carry on imposing London ideology on us whatever we prefer.
Despite having a devolved parliament that tried at every juncture to put forward compromise solutions, and despite the SNP being the third largest party in the HoC – and the SNP do do their best to represent all the Scottish people – we have been ignored, as usual. The point I am trying to make here is that, if the SNP as third largest party in the HoC does not have the power to pick and choose when we can have an indyref, then it is wholly unlikely they have the power to frustrate parliament, brexit, the will of the brainwashed masses etc. Size, here, does matter – it is impossible for any Scottish influence to affect the outcome of brexit. They are entirely correct to show integrity and campaign for no brexit to my mind – if you accept that Scotland is a separate nation and has its own needs/desires and that, as part of the Union, we can only voice it through acting within Westminster rules; but then every time our wishes or voice is dismissed, another person becomes aware of the unfairness of the system we have, becomes aware that we could do so much better if we had the freedom to choose for ourselves, becomes aware that maybe we don’t need to be dictated to,,, etc. And every person that becomes aware, turns into many people becoming aware. Everyone is different, everyone needs a different type of argument to make them see the sense in self determination. For too long we have been sold the idea of Westminster as a benign ruler – this is not true, but it can be hard for people to change long held beliefs, reinforced daily by the media.
The damage brexit can do, and has already done, is on a graded scale, but it will not ever be zero now. Not just to people’s opinions of the Union, but in international standing and trust in the EU. Scotland has always been at the mercy of its larger ‘partner’, and many people are becoming aware of what that can mean in real terms, and that there is an alternative now to the past feelings of disenfranchisement and hopelessness. Whatever the actual purpose the Tories have, the government and the state machinery, I doubt they will be putting anything back in the box now.
I am being long-winded. But the urgency of people proclaiming that the SNP must act now, seems more out of fear manufactured by media propaganda, rather than actual reasoning, we must have the majority of people in Scotland believing independence is the best way. There is likely now or soon, and will increase with the wonderful campaigning that can be done, but we still have the state machinery acting against us to have the choice. And timing is crucial. Think how the rhetoric of ‘the SNP are acting against the will of the [english] people’ has grown, well they don’t represent those people, they represent the people that voted remain, Scottish people (for all the people that say ‘not me!’: that’s not how representative democracy works). We are here and now part of a union, that refuses to accept Scotland has a difference of opinion, if the SNP rolled over and said that’s fine (as the other parties are doing) ,,, they would not be doing their job. If the Tories thought the SNP were thwarting brexit, we’d have had our referendum by now. If you are just irritated at the time and effort they are putting in – I believe it is changing opinion in Scotland, and not a total waste.
We have had endless anti-independence campaigning from before and since 2014, (possibly sparing us from the really toxic brexit campaigning?), we don’t need it ramped up for any length of time, I’m sure the lies will become more outrageous than before, and we don’t need an independence referendum being blamed for any thwarting of Brexit, and every single move the Tory government makes now further destroys any pretence the better together crew have of it being better together, every single promise has been broken now. I’m banking on an indyref happening next year mind you (or alternatives), and likely will not be so understanding if it isn’t.
On dissolution: this is the very best outcome for all member countries/state of the U.K. We will all benefit. Don’t live in the past, look to the future.
Contrary –
if we didn’t want representatives that support the Scottish people we would have carried on voting for Labour and Conservative lickspittle lackies that just carry on imposing London ideology on us whatever we prefer.
Can I stop you there? Cos you’re not being fair.
I’ve lived in London for over 10 years now. It’s a socially diverse, progressive island of common sense, left-of-centre thinking. OK, it can be a little Guardianista, champagne socialist in pockets, but overall the approach to politics and fairness is one which is really rather closely aligned to most of Scotland. I know that, cos the 40 years I spent being alive before I moved to London were all spent in Edinburgh.
Don’t lump London in with Little England. It is diametrically opposed to that mindset.
In fact, look at the electoral results map…in almost every major urban centre in England & Wales, Labour are in the ascendancy. It’s only when we get to the bits of the OS maps that aren’t purple do we begin to see the rise of conservatism, Brexitry and other forms of ‘scared politics’.
On dissolution: this is the very best outcome for all member countries/state of the U.K. We will all benefit. Don’t live in the past, look to the future.
Other views are available 🙂
For example, I think that Scotland could have played a major part in joining with the many parts of England that are against Brexit, Austerity, Little-English Supremacy and so on. If we’d all have stuck together then I think we could have stopped the rot before Cameron and Osborne got a foothold. What saddens me is that we still could.
Westminster (shorthand here for Little England) needs to wake up and understand that Scotland, NI and Wales are not simply vassal states existing to service England. Respect needs to be shown to every citizen of these islands… just think how much better we would all be if everyone living here truly thought that GB was a Great place to live? Cos at the moment they don’t. MY own view is that the reaction to that shouldn’t be fragmenting, downsizing and almost inevitably embracing a more parochial mindset of the sort I’ve so reviled in my comments here. If we could all find it in ourselves to work together – GENUINELY together, not like Cameron’s view of together – then we could make the UK brilliant again. If we did that and stayed in Europe, applying the same approach to work from within to fix the EU’s many flaws, then the whole continent could be brilliant too. And that’s a step to a much more harmonious world.
That’s the future I want to look forward to. Unfortunately, we choose to separate build walls around ourselves. It’s a crying shame.
Ah well 🙁
I think you’re right: London is much more liberal than the rest of England
Geearkay wrote “don’t lump London in with Little England. It is diametrically opposed to that mindset.”
I recognise that London is a cosmopolitan capital city where views are bound to be diverse, reflecting a wide range of opinion, and that its prevailing mindset is likely to be more liberal than the “Little England” mindset. However London is also the undoubted seat of the UK Establishment (monarchy, government, banking, big business, media etc) and the unlistening, intransigent attitude of successive Westminster governments towards the problems of the UK nations and regions has led to widespread disaffection with “London” rule across much of the UK.
London has always been very keen to identify itself as the seat of power where everything of real importance in the UK happens. It is also happy to be the nexus of an economic system which sucks money, talent and resources out of the rest of the UK, so it has acquired a tainted reputation across the UK. I don’t have any mandate to speak for Contrary, but given that he/she used the expression “London ideology” in the context of Labour and Conservative UK-wide party politics, I’m pretty sure he/she’s saying “London” as shorthand for UK governance.
I think it’s a bit disingenuous of you to claim “that Scotland could have played a major part in joining with the many parts of England that are against Brexit, Austerity, Little-English Supremacy and so on. If we’d all have stuck together then I think we could have stopped the rot before Cameron and Osborne got a foothold. What saddens me is that we still could.”
Look closely at how the Tories conducted their so-called Brexit planning: they ran Brexit as Tory Project (but without a discernible Project Plan) when it should have been a UK-national Project. Scotland voted strongly against Brexit in 2016 but was entirely shut out of discussions even though all economic predictions showed that Scotland would suffer disproportionately whatever the Brexit outcome would be.
Thatcher’s policies of the 70s and 80s altered thinking about UK allegiance/Scottish independence and that direction of travel has intensified greatly in the last 20 years, with the recent Brexit bourach putting the tin hat on it. Your notion of “making the UK brilliant again” is no longer feasible in Scotland — that ship has already sailed — besides there are clear advantages to being a small independent nation with huge natural resources within Europe.
As a person who I lived in London for 22 years, and has not now for 18, and who does have some experience of the ‘metropolitan elite’ with whom I suspect I have mingled on occasion I think this issue os profoundly nuanced.
London is, despite any appearance otherwise to an outsider, a series of what are little more than villages: communities are often quite small and do not overlap well, just as is true outside the metropolis. But what is also true is that in London is much easier to only mix with your own ‘sort’ because there are going to be more of them. The result is that there is no such thing as a ‘London’ view. There are vast numbers of them.
That said, I have found in all my various London networks more liberal outlooks than outside London: and the social diversity is also greater, including (at least in my experience) amongst your own ‘sort’. In many ways that’s what I miss most about London.
And in general L0ondon is more enlightened: the electoral maps that suggest a Tory wipeout may well be right. In that sense it may well be like Scotland.
.
“I think you’re right: London is much more liberal than the rest of England”
Because the Tories go home at tea time to the constituencies where they live ?
Much more cosmopolitan than most of the rest of the country and that should be a positive thing. It was generally very positive for the ‘remain’ vote. Some of the more northerly Leave voting areas would maybe say “It’s alright for them, they can afford to be liberal” (?)
Ken –
I honestly don’t think I’m being disingenuous. People tend to say “London” when they mean “Westminster”, or “The City of London”.
Westminster is all the things you say it is and probably more… but that’s parliament which is made up of representatives from all over the country. The fact it is geographically situated in London is secondary. These people would probably come out with the same policies if the House of Commons was in Manchester, Birmingham, Swansea or Glasgow.
The City of London is a gated community. It’s all about business and finance. Historically the home of the Merchant’s Guilds, it’s totally sold itself to Mammon now. Nobody lives in the City. The “City view” is that of multi-national corporations.
London is exactly as Richard says. I’ve never met anyone who would just say they live in London. People live in Lambeth, Southwark, Crouch End, Camberwell, Ealing, Edmonton, Wembley, Brentford… and so on.
I used to think as you do until I moved down here. All my ire was directed at “That London”… but I know better now. Westminster and The City are where I pour my scorn – and they’ve got nothing to do with your average Londoner.
Andy –
Spot on. The Tories all sod off to Hertfordshire, Kent and Sussex at the end of the day.
Agree with that lot
Geearkay says:
” The fact [parliament] is geographically situated in London is secondary. These people would probably come out with the same policies if the House of Commons was in Manchester, Birmingham, Swansea or Glasgow.”
Secondary perhaps, but very significant I would say. The combined spending power of MPs, Lords and civil servants and all the surrounding ‘hangers-on’ who need, or want, to be close to the centre of government, produces a centre of vast prosperity.
If Parliament rotated to the other major centres around the country (the upheaval would be immense) the prosperity would be shared. In theory the prosperity is shared through taxation and government spending but …….. it demonstrably isn’t.
“The City of London is a gated community. It’s all about business and finance. Historically the home of the Merchant’s Guilds, it’s totally sold itself to Mammon now. Nobody lives in the City. The “City view” is that of multi-national corporations.”
I think technically it’s a sort of independent City State. Rather on medieval lines. Not really a part of London proper at all. A bit like Vatican City is to Rome.
In response to Geearkay’s 8th Oct post at 8:48am:
I think you misunderstand my meaning if you think my use of ‘disingenuous’ was meant to be applied to the widespread conflation of ‘London’ with ‘Westminster’ etc. I was applying it to your assertion that, if Scotland had only worked with other non-Brexit factions in England, it could have worked out differently. That was never a practical option, simply because the Tories ran Brexit as a Tory-only project and totally ignored input from the devolved parliaments. The Scottish and Welsh Governments did co-operate on information exchange, strategy etc (NI wasn’t party to this because Stormont wasn’t functioning, so there was no NI Gov), but all attempts to have dialogue with the Tory Gov in Westminster were either rebuffed or ignored.
I thought the comments were closed on this thread, so I am delighted to find otherwise what with all this fascinating London-chat. First off, it is always fascinating to see what small thing might spark interest and (polite) outrage – Ken has the right of it though, in his first post, it was a lax throwaway reference to London, as in London the seat of power, and is commonly used (outside of the south east obviously), not a commentary on London itself.
But all the rest, well, of course London is cosmopolitan and enlightened – it sucks the rest of the country and the U.K. dry – it has the biggest investments (has the best run public transport systems, for example, but also many ancient buildings preserved, huge investment etc etc) and also sucks in talent and people – want a job in broadcasting, the arts etc? You very likely need to go to London. Maybe our ‘little Britain/england’ would not exist at all if all this investment was more evenly spread. I’m sure it is not obvious when you are in the orbit of London, but I can assure you the rest of the U.K. is very limited in choices, for many things.
Even a modicum more fairness in geographical distribution of investment by government may go a long way to enhancing people’s happiness. (Therefore making them less angry at the wrong things, that they are told to be angry about)
(As for dissolution being the best outcome for all, I should qualify that by saying best socially and culturally, and I’m sure other opinions don’t matter on this issue 🙂 )
On the topic of numbers, I ran the numbers on last years March in an engineering sort of way ( I am engineer…) at the time based on my estimates of m2 per person, the time it took me to walk, the length of arrival time, the area of johnston terrace etc etc yaddah yaddah.
I consistently got to about 85-95k for last years claimed 100k and so suffered a big case of CBA this time re the numbers.
The BBC meantime persisted on website this year to mendaciously repeat ad nauseum the ridiculous 20k from last year attributed somehow to Edinburgh Council, an SNP controlled administration.
The liars are all liars because they are scared of us. If they are scared then it was deffo 200k.
The bbc Scotland report on the news on Saturday evening was however a sea change in attitude – see the clip on prof John Robertson’s blog and elsewhere. Very surprisingly factually neutral.
They can sense it coming.
200k sounds realistic. 20k doesn’t.
30% tory voters too is probably correct – on a normal turnout.
There was an overall 800k total vote difference between tories and labour in 2017.
Both got about 40% on a relatively highish turnout (not highest).
May’s snap election was called when they were 20% ahead in the (spit) polls.
They are supposedly 15% ahead now. This time no snap election, everyone who wants to vote, will be registered. The issues will be clear. The rabid msm attacks will not wash as well.
A 70%+ turnout will see that 800k gap closed & more marginal seats will come into play.
If the traditional Scottish tory voters are minded to withhold their traditional vote – then the same may happen in the English traditional tory seats too.
Whatever the result – it is the most crucial election. It will decide Scotlands future too.
We must encourage the highest turnout regardless of what people decide to vote. I would rather live with a result with high participation then a pathetic one.
What a load of tosh again. I’ll give you one fact old boy [based on your definition of ‘fact’]: in around 20 years time your blog will likely no longer be in existence. Is that a fact?!?!?! There are academics and there are accountants. And I know which one you are…. 🙂
Do you know many accountants who submit six academic papers in a year?
No, me neither
Excepting me, that is, by your definition. I will achieve that this year, at least.
Now, politely, go away and stop trolling.
Once (I usually say if) Scottish independence happens do you think that there will be mass migration from Northern England to the borders?
Yes
As far as numbers for the Scottish AUOB march on Saturday in Edinburgh …there are plenty of aerial photos and videos available. If anybody wants to count heads, I’m sure it’s possible. At any rate, it was a huge march.
Nicola Sturgeon herself doesn’t attend ANY indy marches (neither do many other SNP members like myself, for various reasons.) However, to suggest that it means Nicola’s not serious about independence or is dragging her feet out of cowardice, is ludicrous. Anti-SNP people will grasp at anything, won’t they?
When we do win–and we will–the win will be both decisive AND legal–thanks to the hard work of the Scottish government keeping Scotland ticking over during these hard times, and the SNP’s Executive members who are setting up the conditions for the referendum to take place as we ‘speak.’
We keep calm and carry on.
Jan Foley says:
“We keep calm and carry on.”
Well yes, it’s the only sensible way to proceed. We saw in 2014 what happens when you get bounced into a decision you aren’t properly prepared for.
If David Cameron had not been so confident that he deserved to ‘win’ that referendum he might not have been so confident of getting the result he wanted on Brexit and done the preparatory work properly. That would have saved us all an awful lot of anguish and a lot of wasted time and temper.
First, that March. I was there, as last year, and the AUOB official counter informed me that he had reached over 170,000 and that was with what turned out to be three quarter of a mile of marchers still to come. That, for my money and in the light of last year’s experience and that gathered on the Iraq London marches, makes the final total comfortably well over 200,000; it took our group 2 hours and ten minutes to get from Holyrood Palace to Middle Meadow Walk. The comparison with the London anti-Iraq war march is instructive. A population comparison would suggest that an equivalent figure for a UK wide march focussed on London, would have been around 3 million. This is not going away.
As to support at senior levels of the SNP and from the ranks of the Scottish Government, there was that present in plenty – MSPs, Ministers and senior MPs; the star of the soaking wet rally was Joanna Cherry QC MP. Of course, Sturgeon was not there. She has a necessarily longer hand to play and she is doing it with consumate skill. Dinna’ fash – it’s comin’ yet for aw that.
What is uncertain is exactly how and when. Angus Brendan MacNeil’s pressure for a declaration in favour of an Independence Election, I strongly support – but there is a sense in which that will become a reality if only because of Westminster attempts to block a S30 referendum. Essentially the politics and the opinion is so inexorably sliding towards Scotland’s freedom from the UK that Boris, or whoever may be his hapless successor, will have the choice of letting it happen smoothly or having to endure it painfully. The third option – the ‘We’ll-repeat-all-our- bloody-mistakes-in-Ireland-strategy’ WRAOBMIS – apart from being mad, will never get the support of a wider UK (OK mainly English) electorate, whom UK governments have now convinced are having to subsidise lazy Jocks. (The parallels with attitudes – governmental and popular – to ‘British’ India are uncanny.) They’d rather beg us to leave than send a garrison.
If only England would just resign from the UK and thus leave Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales in the EU so much would be solved. Wouldn’t it? It is the ‘will of the People’ (provincial English, understood) after all – or so they keep on saying. Only joking – but in the world turned absurd what else is left?
We’d still have a border issue – and that with Wales would be a nightmare!
True, Richard but re-positioned – and you know we’d very much rather that the ‘U’K stayed in the EU anyway.
However, following that thought through, the atmosphere about this has fundamentally changed in Scotland. The ‘threat’ that there could be an actual ‘border’ with England used to be seen as an Indy vote loser – and so it still may be in some Scottish Border communities, especially Tory tinged towns like Kelso. Now, instead, the dreadful impact of leaving the EU has changed minds and to many seeing an EU border between us and the south, however logically unwelcome, is beginning to look almost like a mark of having arrived – a symbol of achievement. I’ll even confess to secret, irresponsible grin about it every time I drive home past Gretna.