DO you, like me, applaud these politicians who are able to speed-read? Within minutes of the launch of the 100-plus-page document “Building a New Scotland”, Liz Smith of the Tory junta makes the pronouncement: “Never been able to make a convincing economic case for independence, and this paper doesn’t change that”, while Daniel Johnson of the Labour treachery party says: “SNP need to drop the spin and come clean with people about the catastrophic reality of their economic plans”.
Not to be outdone, Willie Rennie of the LibDonuts joins in with: “This paper is not a solution to any of Scotland’s problems. It’s an indulgent distraction,” and “the Scottish Government seem to have an utterly shambolic idea of what’s best for our economy.” Well done to the lot of you: or did you have your responses thought through, and rehearsed, well before the paper had even left the printers?
READ MORE: Stuart Mackintosh: Economic plan for independent Scotland offers stability over disarray
Well, here’s an item of news for you. I, and I suspect, many like me, am not indifferent to the economy: how could I be as I watch the value of my investment ISA plummet! However, I am much, much more enthused by the notion of a Scotland being governed as a sovereign democracy and not as a vassal state to be plundered by a regime that is reliant on that plunder!
Westminster and the three aforementioned stooges will trot out the words “parliamentary democracy” ad nauseum. This, when the last time there was a General Election which returned a Tory majority in Scotland was 1955. Some “democracy”! We now see Labour licking their lips because of the disasters the Tories are orchestrating. This is the same Labour party that, following the 1987 General Election, won 50 of the then 72 Scottish Westminster seats and did absolutely nothing to advance democratic government in Scotland.
Independence may have its price. I’m prepared to pay it! Not for me; for my children and grandchildren!
Ned Larkin
Inverness
HAVING just read Richard Murphy’s declaration that he would vote No to independence if he had a vote following the economic announcements made by the Scottish Government this week, I felt compelled to point out the 80/20 rule.If you are so determined to achieve 100% of what you want when only 80% is on offer then you risk getting none of it.
Most of us who support independence have a vision of the independent Scotland we want. We will all have elements that are not in the current offering, whether they concern EU membership, currency policy, strategy on defence and nuclear weapons ... the list is endless. If we don’t get behind the principle of independence we will never achieve any of those benefits, never mind the launching of our own currency from day one. Mr Murphy talks about how risky the economic strategy would be – it must be up to us, the Scottish people, to elect a responsible government in an independent Scotland that would take the right decisions should the risk he is worried about materialise.
READ MORE: Richard Murphy: SNP currency plans for independence are 'so wrong' I'd switch to No
I am utterly fed up with high profiles in the independence movement throwing their toys out of the pram when their pet projects are not adopted. That’s exactly how this is coming across.
The real upset here is that we should be shouting from the rooftops about the positives of the Scottish Government promoting a wellbeing economy – that is the vote winner. People worried about the economy in an independent Scotland (no matter how much turmoil the UK economy is in) may (however misguided) feel some attachment to the pound. Whip that away and you may just lose their vote. Mr Murphy would do well to remember that until we win those people over, using the arguments and policies that will sell independence to them ,we get nothing of what we want.
Maggie Rankin
Stirling
IN economic thinking I am a lot closer to Professor Richard Murphy’s ideas than to the silly idea of continuing to use sterling as our domestic currency for one day longer than we need to do in order to establish the financial institutions we need for setting up the Scottish pound.
However, I am a long way from him in political ideas. What does Richard expect to gain by suggesting that people like me should vote No at a referendum for independence? How would that help the Scottish economy? Sorry Richard, your economics I quite like, but your politics are pathetic.
READ MORE: Richard Murphy: Currency concerns don't stop me from supporting Scottish independence
I was very unhappy with the SNP’s position on currency in 2014 but I voted Yes. I am not entirely happy with the SNP leadership’s position on it now, but it is considerably better than it was in 2014, so of course I will be voting Yes. It may be that I will still not be happy with the SNP leadership’s position in an independent Scotland – well if that is the case I will fight against it in an independent Scotland, where I will be much more likely to be successful than I ever would in the UK.
So thanks Richard, but no thanks, I will be voting Yes, and fighting for every Yes vote to get our independence and I will continue to argue for Scotland to move as soon as possible away from using the pound Sterling in our domestic economy.
Andy Anderson
Ardrossan
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel