RSS Feed
January 10th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda
By
Tim Luckhurst
Last updated at 1:31 AM on 10th January 2012
The United Kingdom is in grave danger. If in a referendum some time in the next two years Scotland chooses independence, the nation that stood firm against Hitler will cease to exist.
Shorn of its permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and relegated to minnow status in Nato – as we surely would be – the Union of England, Wales and Northern Ireland would lose the power to punch above its weight in international affairs, and face relegation to diplomacy’s second division.
Among the crazier delusions of recent years has been that England without Scotland would be better off. The stark truth is that, along with international respect and influence, a Britain shorn of Scotland would lose assets, including the submarine bases at which our independent nuclear deterrent is based, the universities at which a great many of our doctors are trained, and a talent pool that has produced brilliant leaders in politics, science and the arts.
Prayers: Nationalist sentiment is growing in Scotland but leaving the Union would leave the country worse off
This is the scale of the threat posed by the SNP and its desire to cut itself free of the Auld Enemy. It is why David Cameron was right to insist this week that if there is to be a referendum in Scotland on that country’s independence, it must take place in the next 18 months. It is a gamble on Mr Cameron’s part, and a brave one, but for now at least he has seized back the initiative in this ongoing battle for political supremacy.
And he will need all his guile to outfox Alex Salmond. Left to his own devices, the SNP leader would invite Scots to decide our future on June 24, 2014, the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn, in which Scots under Robert the Bruce defeated the English King Edward II’s army.
A British Prime Minister would be mad to
hand the SNP such an opportunity to exploit separatist sentiment. That
is why the 1998 Scotland Act, which created the Scottish Parliament,
bans the Scottish Government from organising a referendum on
independence.
Cunning: Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond wants independence
Devolution was designed to save the Union, not to destroy it, so decisions about the future of the United Kingdom can only be taken by the sovereign British Parliament. What Mr Cameron must beware of is making too much play of this and appearing to be some kind of arrogant Flashman-type figure dictating to the restless natives north of the border what they can and cannot do.
But he is right to force the pace, because the issue cannot be ignored.
Since last May, when the incompetence of Scottish Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat politicians handed the SNP victory at Holyrood, Mr Salmond and his colleagues have said little about independence. They know there is no majority rooting for it in Scotland. Their most desperate prayer has been for time in which to convince Scots voters to abandon a partnership that, since 1707, has served Scotland admirably.
Despite frenzied denials from the SNP, many Scots understand that the sumptuous public services and free higher education that make Scotland such an easy place to live are not paid for by taxes raised in Scotland. England provides the subsidy that guarantees NHS spending per patient is up to £400 a year higher than south of the border. Free public transport for pensioners and free home care for elderly Scots are both financed by English families who plead in vain for comparable services.
Scottish institutions such as Royal Bank of Scotland have been rescued from oblivion by English largesse. But this is what rich areas of democracies all over the world do for their less affluent regions. It explains why the SNP can win Scottish elections but has never been able to persuade Scots to support abolition of the United Kingdom – until now.
David Cameron must be careful not to come across as an arrogant Flashman-type character, right, played here by Malcolm McDowel
The tragedy of British politics since May 2011 is that the leaders of the three Unionist parties have failed to confront the blend of anti-British rhetoric and fantasy economics upon which the SNP won power in Edinburgh. Instead of explaining that the United Kingdom’s success as a state made up of distinctive nations has been much greater than anything the constituent parts achieved alone, they have let the SNP set the agenda.
I congratulate Mr Cameron on abandoning this failed policy of appeasement. It is bad for Britain and bad for Scotland, where business leaders have been warning for years that uncertainty over the constitution damages confidence and economic growth. But the Prime Minister’s suggestion that Westminster might grant Holyrood the authority to conduct a referendum provided it is held soon is only the beginning of the battle.
Mr Cameron must also insist that any referendum asks a plain yes/no question. There must be no ‘third way’ option of the type the SNP calls ‘devolution-max’, which would grant Holyrood complete power over Scottish law, politics and taxation, but leave Scotland within the UK and Scottish MPs at Westminster still able to vote on English affairs.
Britain must also avoid a situation – what one might call a ‘neverendum’ – in which the SNP is allowed to keep inviting the Scots to participate in referendums until it gets the answer it wants. The first vote must be final.
But these are technicalities. To really frighten the SNP, the Prime Minister must mount a passionate defence of the United Kingdom. He must remind voters in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland that this country is a unique force for good that has served the world as admirably as it has served its own citizens.
After 1707 British governments were able to call on the genius that exists in every part of the UK to accomplish acts of true greatness. Working together, Britons built the world’s most dynamic trading empire, abolished the slave trade that shamed civilisation and built democracy without recourse to revolutionary violence.
This nation’s finest hour came when servicemen from Aberdeen and Aberystwyth fought alongside comrades from Dundee, Belfast and Birmingham to deny the Third Reich dominance of Europe. But victory over evil in a war that left Britain more united than ever was not the end of a most precious partnership that should still be nurtured at all costs.
Some Conservatives question this, believing England without Scotland would always elect a Tory government, and secretly hoping the Prime Minister will encourage Scotland to go it alone. That view is appallingly short-sighted.
The demise of the UK might cause delight in Paris, Berlin and Dublin, and enhance the prospects for federal union in Europe – these are reasons for every patriot to support the Prime Minister’s belated crusade to save our homeland.
If the future of the UK is not the most important question facing the UK, what is?
Tim Luckhurst is Professor of Journalism at the University of Kent and a former editor of The Scotsman
Share this article:
Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
or debate this issue live on our message boards.
The comments below have not been moderated.
-
Newest -
Oldest -
Best rated -
Worst rated
Some of the nicest people I have ever met are Scots. But I think it is now time to let them go – we don’t owe them anything. They should be independent. Think of the subsidies we would save under the absurdly outdated Barnet formula. I think England could do quite nicely going forward as an independent nation state. We also need to distance ourselves from the shambolic EU with their rotten accounting system which has failed to pass audit scrutiny for 17 years running. We are an integral part of the global network – we need to look to the deep blue sea – as ever.
Report abuse
What absolutely outrageous bunk.
Scotland massively subsidises England and has done for at least 35 years.
In the latest figures available – 2009 – Scotland posted a budget surplus of 3.5 billion pounds whilst England posted a deficit of 73 billion pounds.
Without the parasitic England dragging her down Scotland would be the 6th richest country in the world.
And that’s not even counting the enormous potential of her sustainable energy resources which are the largest per capita in the world. A third of the offshore wind energy in Europe for starters.
The kind of mythmaking in this article is one of the reasons the Scots resent subsidising the rest of the UK and helps to make it inevitable that Scotland will decide to go it alone.
Report abuse
Rubbish. England can look after itself.
Report abuse
Its for the Scottish people to decide their future not Cameron and the Conservative party.
Report abuse
Most people in Scotland and England are relaxed about Scottish independence.
In reality, a common defence pact would be worked out – it would be silly not to.
The British Isles would remain. All the social ties would remain.
The main difference is that Scotland would have a bit more political power and influence, and the self respect of paying it’s own way.
Report abuse
The British parliament is not sovereign in Scotland . The people are. The sovereignty of England is its parliament but it doesn’t have one. There is only the UK parliament which technically has no sovereignty at all. This however would change automatically if Scotland votes for independence as the Westminster parliament would become the parliament of England and Wales. English friends you are also being screwed by your government the same as we in Scotland have been. You have a right to self determination. As England. Not as a majority shareholder in a multinational with no voting shares. Take your country back the way we are doing. Be proud. Do not let them force a referendum on Scotland whilst denying you one on the EU. We are not enemies. We are common slaves of the yoke called the Union. be free vote yes.
Report abuse
A wonderful article which misses only one single but rather important point.
What has the Union done for Scotland?
Report abuse
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
Related posts:
Views: 1
Posted in 
Tags: 
