Tuesday, 26 August 2014

Sovereign Will

Alex Salmond is a man very, very, very used to his own way. When he says "the Sovereign Will of the Scottish People," he means "the Sovereign Will of Alex Salmond."

But while either might obtain in Scotland, neither has any force anywhere else.

It may or may not be either the sovereign will of the Scottish people or the sovereign will of Alex Salmond that there be a currency union (as which merely using someone else's currency is not at all the same thing) with the state that would undoubtedly still be called the United Kingdom.

But so what?

That would certainly not be the sovereign will of the Parliament, people or anything else of the United Kingdom. Opposition in Wales would be particularly pronounced, and would carry the weight of loyalty. The areas that would be most opposed would be the most strongly Labour areas.

The answer would be No.

Scotland can become Panama, of all the places the names of which might resonate from her history. But if she wants a currency union, then she already has one. On 18th September, she will vote on whether or not to remain in it.


  1. This referendum may not be decided solely by the sovereign will of the Scottish people. The English may also have a say. The 2001 census revealed that over 400,000 English people lived in Scotland and I presume that many (most?) of these will be on the electoral register. Not all will be entitled to vote but the number who will could well influence the outcome. It seems a little ironic that Scots people living and working in England (many for the BBC, for example) are barred from voting yet English people living and working in Scotland have the vote. Or have I, and Mr Salmond, missed something here?

    1. No, you are quite right.

      The number of Scots-born people in England is equal to the entire population of Scotland. One fifth of which was born in England, a fact which gives some context to how badly the Conservatives nevertheless do in Scotland.

      Popular sovereignty always falls down when one asks how it is exercised, or who comprises "The People", or both.

  2. All the threats and blackmail are only driving more voters into the Yes camp. The Scots are a stubborn lot and won't put up with that. Anyone who knows them, knows that.

    As Salmond knows.

    He's using the currency union to provoke threats from Westminster, driving more Scottish people into his arms.

    Very, very clever chap.

    1. Not really. A lot more highly rated outside Scotland than inside, as we shall very soon see.

      These are not threats. They are just facts. There is not, and there has never been, the slightest possibility of a currency union.

  3. He doesn't care in the slightest. He's using it to get the numbers up.

    I've met plenty of Scots who are voting Yes just to spite those who sought to blackmail them by threatening to block them from using the pound.

    It has backfired. Salmond knows exactly what he's doing.

    He's so clever he even got Obama, Cameron and the Pope to condemn independence, driving Protestants, the whole of the Left and anti Americans into his arms.

    Very clever chap.

  4. The Scots are a proud people who just won't be bullied.

    The unionists lost the minute they resorted to blackmail.

    Millionaire Michelle Mone threatening to move South summed it up. She had to have expected the reaction she got.

    Salmond couldn't have asked for more.

  5. Getting "bra tycoon" Michelle Mone to threaten to move to England was another coup for Salmond.

    She had to have expected the reaction she got.

    Surely she must know her fellow countrymen better than that.

    Salmond is playing a blinder.

    All he needs is Obsma to come steaming in again or for Westminster to threaten to block an independent Scotland using the pound.

    He's won it.

  6. There is no bullying or blackmail in any of this, but mere sober statements of self-evident fact. Of course there would not be a currency union. Don't be silly.

    Salmond seems to think that if he were in the strange circumstance where simply being Alex Salmond might not automatically get him whatever he wanted, then all that he would have to do would be to shout loud enough.

    But it would not work like that.

    Of course, there is going to be a No vote, anyway.

  7. There's no reason for not having one, apart from blackmail. Europe has a currency union of far more countries than two.

    The No camp have already admitted they've lost the argument. Alistair Darling summed it up-he never once used the word "British" or spoke of the positive aspects of the United Kingdom out shared history and culture in either debate. Just threatened that various companies might relocate South, Westminster might stop them using the pound etc.

    When financial blackmail is all you have, then you've lost the argument with the Scottish people. They don't put up with that sort of thing.

    And nor should they.

  8. To be fair, the No camp has taken some criticism for making an almost entirely negative case for the status quo (you might lose jobs, your currency etc if you leave) but I can understand it.

    All the positive arguments for Union are no longer true.

    As Peter Hitchens says we can hardly tell them we can be free and independent if we are together, since either way Scotland and England are ruled through the EU and our ancient liberties and laws are being abolished.

    And , as for our once shared language and Protestant Christian religion what does Scotland have culturally in common with Muslim Bradford, East European Slough or multicultural London?

    Absolutely nothing.

    England isn't independent or British any more so there's no point asking the Scots to stay.