Mar 182014

4 YesWith thanks to Dave Watt.

With the Scottish Independence Referendum just 6 months away the positive case for a YES vote in September comes to Aberdeen on Friday 28th of March, with the visit of 4 major YES figures.

Author Alan Bissett of the National Collective is joined by Scottish Greens leader Patrick Harvie MSP, Alan Grogan, head of of Labour for Independence and Natalie McGarry of Women For Independence as they tell us why they believe we need a Yes vote.

Each of these acclaimed speakers will give a brief description of their vision for an independent Scotland and why they’re voting Yes before the audience is given the unique opportunity to put their questions to some of the most prominent figures in the Yes campaign.

This event is a perfect opportunity for those who remain undecided to listen to and then question leading Yes figures as to why Scotland should vote Yes in September and their views as to what an Independent Scotland will look like following a Yes vote.

The event begins at 19.30 at the MacRobert Lecture Theatre, Aberdeen University on Friday 28th of March.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

  7 Responses to “The Positive Case For YES – Fri March 28th”

  1. “4 major YES figures” I can hardly wait!

    Anyone who claims to be in a position to provide their “vision” for an independent Scotland is misleading people. What they can provide is a summary of their own personal ideology and rhetorical statements which seek to support that ideology. Such rhetoric would include phrases such as, for example, “Scots should be in control of their own destiny” whilst failing to acknowledge that there is currently no such proposition available to us.

    At this moment in time, we are being offered the chance to vote to continue to be constrained and controlled by the Bank of England, which is, in turn, controlled by the UK Government at Westminster and by the EU. Even this proposal would be dependent upon everyone in the UK and Europe, other than the SNP leadership, being liars who are trying to scare us. There is no other offer on the table as we are told that the “liars” will see sense if Scotland votes for Independence and, therefore, no other option is required.

    I am certainly not ideologically opposed to Scottish Independence but am opposed to being deliberately misled. The ideological day – dreaming and surreal denial of those who lead the Yes campaign do not a “vision” make.

    • As far as I’m aware, none of the above are SNP candidates. The SNP white paper suggests a currency share and continued EU membership. These folks, hopefully (although, I agree, unlikely), might provide us with an alternative vision.

      Your statement about being dependent on “everyone in the UK and Euro zone being liars” is pretty much nonsense. The bank of England have accepted a currency union is possible. The only people denying it are politicians. I’m not suggesting they’re liars, but surely it’s not beyond the realm that a conservative government could perform a u-turn?

      For what its worth, I see very little in the SNP/Yes campaign offering that makes independence worthwhile, beyond our massively fairer electoral system.

  2. I’ve just been thinking, if Scotland became independent it will affect the political make up of the rest of Britain, perhaps considerably so; it could become more right wing which also scares me.

    Scotland has fifty nine parliamentary seats but only one is Conservative, England has five hundred and thirty three parliamentary seats but two hundred and ninety eight are Conservative.

    Scotland does help to reduce (even with its small share of parliament) right of centre policies. I feel we owe it to the welfare of our countrymen/women throughout Britain to help them, and keep Scotland as part of the UK.

    • Sean, those south of the border vote for the right wing governments you complain of. Why feel sorry for someone who inflicts difficulties on themselves?

  3. The main benefit of independence would be that we would have a government that we could elect and depose at the ballot box. That is something we have never been able to do since 1707.

    • Hi Ron,

      Self – determination is a fundamental right which no one denies us. The debate is about whether we achieve a fairer and more prosperous outcome as a voluntary part of an established union of ancient nations within the EU, or as a potentially isolated small state outwith the established union and potentially outwith the EU as well. There is, of course, also the very real probability that such isolation would, based on the arguments so far put forward in favour of Independence, result in us ceding power over our own monetary policy to a foreign and fiscally hostile and powerful foreign country.

      My worry is that there is no rational or substantial argument being made, or evidence provided, to support the view that we should vote for Independence in order to achieve a fairer and more prosperous society and that lies and deception are being used to suggest we will automatically be better off in order to justify Independence. In other words, an ideology based on instinctive nationalist fervour is the end, rather than the means, for many of the most persuasive nationalists, who use wild and unsubstantiated language to convert others to their cause.

      • Hi Bruce,

        I take on board what you say but Westminster policies are seen to benefit London and the South East at the expense of the rest of the country. We have the opportunity to change that in September.

        Scotland has consistently contributed more to the exchequer than she receives back and it is generally accepted by economists that we are perfectly capable of standing on our own two feet.

        While I favour a Scottish currency, in the short to medium term retention of The Pound would be beneficial to both countries. Were Westminster to deny this and The Scottish Government to continue using it (which they are perfectly entitled to do) and to walk away from their apportioned share of the UK debt it could be problematic for sure, but much more of a problem for Westminster who would have to shoulder all the debt, along with the costs of relocating the nuclear arsenal located in Scotland.

        Only time will tell, but we have the opportunity to start anew and form a more compassionate and caring nation who wealth is used for the benefit of it’s residents and not squandered on insanities such as Afghanistan and nuclear weapons.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>