Published On: Sat, May 18th, 2013

Yes vote, no vote, no difference!

Note : This article was sent in by a Scottish UKIP supporter, we hope to follow it up with an interview.



When Labour first gave us a referendum on devolution in Scotland, way back yonder in the 70′s, there was a lovely little caveat inserted into the bill that pledged us the opportunity – we had to have 40% or more of the electorate turn out and vote for devolution. This was back in the starting days of the European project. One could easily put this down to a diehard Unionist inside the Labour party wanting to slow down the process, but the only effect would be to stoke the indignancy of
our people. Landslides are rare and even referenda are no different. Many people do not understand, nor care about voting – not only do I know someone who chooses their vote by playing “Eeine-meiney-miney-moe”, but I know people who are confused by the “Yes or no” answer of the referendum that is on the table.

Looking at the new question, instead of the old question where we had the option to ask for more (but, tellingly, not less) devolution, opinion polls tend to show a win for more devolution, whereas the single question tends to receive a higher percentage of no votes for independence. Now, opinion polls have often been shown to be wrong, but why would David Cameron risk the break-up of the Union instead of offering more devolution in the paper, when the Scottish Conservative And Unionist Party intend to increase devolution anyway? More disconcerting – why would he allow the referendum when it isn’t legally binding? Although heavy-handedness can stoke the fires of discontent, the soft hand shown by Tories towards states in our Empire has historically tended to their secession.

Why did Labour give us the initial referendum on devolution? Until 1997, Scotland mainly supported Labour and Tony Blair knew fine well that if any of the Celtic countries voted for independence, his party would be marginalised in national elections when devolution comes to the natural conclusion of independence. Furthermore,
in creating the National Assembly and Holyrood, he knew that he was creating two mini-states, with their own two-party systems. Tony must have known that in each cycle of elections where Plaid Cmyru and the Scottish National Party gain, they would wrangle more powers from Westminster. Interestingly, he did not need the boost that promising such a referendum would give to his votes to win, nor did he seek to try any other method of addressing the West Lothian question – such as giving Scottish ministers the power to vote over matters which affect England and not Scotland.

So we have a situation where the Conservatives, Lib Dems, and Labour are campaigning against the Scottish National Party, against a situation which they all engineered. We also have the SNP wanting us to retain European membership, which Barroso (the President of the EU) tells us we will have to reapply for. Although Salmond grandstands about keeping the pound, the fact of the matter is that he will have to adopt the Euro (albeit there will probably be a waiting period until Europe considers us eligible to adopt it), because it is a requirement for joining the EU. As the United Kingdom will not longer exist as is, they might even have to take the Euro on

In any case, more power will be transferred to Europe than what we have already given. Even during the transition period to the Euro, we will be under the rules of the European Central Bank. We will also have less representation that what we would in an independent UK, as the UK has less ministers in Europe than Scotland has in the UK. How smaller still our influence shall be.

The European Union ran an interesting little trick of illegally funding the yes vote campaign for the Republic of Ireland on the Lisbon treaty. When Ireland wholeheartedly rejected it, they ran it again and they won. Doubtless, they would have continued to run this until they had won. While all of the bickering over separation from the UK is occurring, Europe grows stronger and we become increasingly integrated into it. Seeing as how Salmond, Clegg, Cameron and Milliband all know that more than 70% of our laws are made in Europe and they are all Europhiles, it has to be asked – was this situation engineered not for the benefit of Scotland or the Scottish people but the oligarchs and Europe?


by Allan Murray


send responses to