FREEDOM!!!! [2]

"Monks say it is "not fair" to blame their Buckfast Tonic Wine for crime in Scotland.
The former Strathclyde Police in Scotland linked it to nearly 6,500 crime reports in the last three years.
But in his first interview on the subject, Abbot David Charlesworth of Buckfast Abbey says the monastery's tonic wine "is not made to be abused".
"We make a product which is a tonic wine.
"It annoys me to think that these problems, all the social deprivation of an area of Scotland, is being put on our doorstep.
"That's not fair. I'm not producing drugs, which I know are going to be used abusively."- BBC

Um, sorry Abbot, but yes you are, its alcohol, so it is a drug and you do know people are going to abuse it, people always do. Me for example!     

Didn't they change the recipe to make it more alcoholic once they went commercial?

That would not surprise me.

I've been drinking some Talisker over Christmas Petty.

Now isn't that a much more suitable tipple for a scotsman?

You lucky bastard, thats a fine single malt from the islands. You are drinking better than me, Im currently on a whyte & mackay Glasgow special blended whisky. Not complaining mind its a good blended whisky, but a single malt from the isles- thats truly something to savor.
I hope you are enjoying it (and havent gone and ruined it by doing something English like adding water or something   )

It is. Skye actually. And I certainly have.  

I think I would go for any of the cheaper single malts over the blended stuff personally, but that's down to taste as well I guess.

Worst thing is if they tried selling it at the prices they sell it at around here around your parts there would probably be a riot.     

And I certainly have- Blue

Is that certainly have enjoyed it, or certainly have added water to it? {{  }}

Oh, enjoyed it of course.  

Your not one of those people who adds a drop of water then I take it?

If it needed water the bloody distiller would have added it!
As far as I am concerned adding anything to a whisky, especially a single malt is an offence to the distiller, you may as well go round his house set fire to the thatch, have sex with his wife and pee in his vats.   

Doesn't that sounds like a very Scottish thing to do?     

Never to a distiller.   

Your neighbours on the other hand once you've drunk a few, they are fair game.   

True true.    

A wonderful fact about whisky is that it started out as farmers illegally distilling their excess corn out in their fields, and now it's deservedly a worldwide industry.

Good on you Scots I'd say Petty.

 slàinte

Gesundheit.

Oh, sorry.   

Slàinte to you too Petty.

Papers releaed under the 30 year rule are proving interesting reading -

Details have emerged of attempts by ministers to make secret cuts to the Scottish budget during Margaret Thatcher's premiership.
John Redwood, then a Downing Street adviser, wanted cuts of £500m to Scotland's budget, the papers reveal.
Then Scottish Secretary George Younger opposed deep cuts, sparking a cabinet row.
Mr Redwood, who went on to become the Welsh secretary in 1993, suggested that Mr Rees and Mrs Thatcher should "discuss how to broach the subject of the £900m overspend with the Secretary of State for Scotland, which could result in £0.5bn savings in due course".
Mrs Thatcher rejected this level of cuts, but in a memo her Private Secretary Andrew Turnbull said she felt "it would be better... to trim Scottish programmes as and when opportunity arose rather than through a very conspicuous exercise".
Another memo from Mr Turnbull said "great care" should be taken when handling the cuts, and "there should be no attempt to publicise the figures".
The Treasury later insisted on a further £36m in cuts for 1985-86, but made clear that the figures previously announced in the Autumn Statement would be unchanged "so minimising the risk that these adjustments will be 'visible'".
in December 1984, he wrote to Mr Rees saying he was willing to "trim my programme by whatever figure I judged could be guaranteed to remain invisible to my critics in these matters".
"I am simply not prepared to run the acute political risks of cutting my programme further by an arbitrary amount, which I would be unable to explain or defend," he said.- BBC Scotland


Now this might all seem in the past but what happens if Scotland votes no to Independence?
The Tories we already know have tried to have secret discussions about renegotiating the Barnett Formula by which Scotland's block grant is calculated. If their proposals go ahead our 'reward' for sticking with the Union would be a cut in our budget by an estimated four billion per year.

Tories they never change regards Scotland- always looking for secret ways to shaft us and take our resources for as little as possible.
Same as they did during the 70's devolution referendum, same as they did when they fiddled and hid the oil revenue figures- same as when they refused to set up an oil saving fund because it would have made it to obvious how wealthy Scotland is.
Why should we trust a word Cameron says now?

Why should we trust a word Cameron says now? - Petty

I wouldn't....

Me neither.

If you get Freedom, would you also be Free from the Brittish purse? Not a snide remark, a genuine question. Would Scotland be totally responsible for its own upkeep? The reason I ask is that business of possibly billions of dollars being cut if you stay in the Union. If you drop out, does that mean there will be a total cut?

Dont know if this will play where (it apparently doesnt in the UK- but UK folks can watch it on Channel 4 anyway), its series 1 episode 4 and is on 4OD)-

Tony Robinsons Walking through History series looking at Scottish clans and the Jacobite revolution- interesting stuff which puts Scotlands socialist leanings in a historic context as well as demonstrating nicely why, to me, what Tolkien wrote felt so real- as a kid exploring the hills I was always stumbling upon mysterious stuff left by forgotten people-

Only have time to watch a few minutes of this now, but will come back. I love this kind of stuff, Petty. I could watch historical documentaries for the rest of my days without complaint.

Ive bookmarked it so I can catch up, I also enjoy Hysterical things like this !
When I watch a good informative prog it feels like Ive had a good meal, IF I watch a "soap" or "reality" show, ( like yeah ! as if ) I feel like Ive eaten a 2day old Mc Donalds.

If you get Freedom, would you also be Free from the Brittish purse?- Orwell

Sorry Orwell, I missed this post somehow first time through.

You have touched on a thorny contentious subject at the heart of the debate.

The short answer is yes and no!

The longer answer is when the SNP way back first came up with their outline of an independent Scotland the idea was to switch to the Euro- but when it became politically toxic that was a no go.
The back up position is a Sterling zone- we retain the pound and the Bank of England would retain control over interest rates.

The UK government refuse to pre-negotiate on it though so they can say the SNP cant guarantee it and its a huge risk- its also open to the charge what is the point of independence if the purse strings are still attached to the Bank of England? (who would set interest rates and decide levels of borrowing)

The SNP response is the Bank of England, despite the name is an independent body founded by a Scotsman and that as the pound was created as part of the Union it is equally Scottish as it is English (or Welsh or Irish- and Scottish banks already produce their own bank notes- they are not issued from England and we already have our own financial laws as Scottish justice system is separate from the English and always has been).
And that more importantly England would benefit from a sterling zone as Scottish resources, particularly in oil and fishing, go a long way to offsetting the UK balance of payments- if England were to reject a fiscal pact on sterling they would effectively be adding billions to their debt overnight.
They also argue that as the trade balance and standard of living between the two is so close the setting of interest rates would not be a huge effect- if we had our own central bank doing it or were in the euro it would be just as independent anyway, and more importantly for them it allows Scotland to raise and retain its own revenue and to set tax rates ect whcih they cannot do right now.

Most independent commentators think that if there is a yes vote Westminster would indeed negotiate a sterling zone- but for now the Tories rule it out as part of the politics of the No campaign as it creates an air of uncertainty about would happen after a yes vote.

Its one of the main battle grounds of the referendum.

Some interesting bits of debate popping up on Independence- the BBC Scotland site has a piece on what effect Indpendence would have on RUK-

"If the Scots vote Yes then the UK is heading for its most significant constitutional crisis since the Great Reform Bill clashes of 1830-32," wrote David Aaronovitch.
The most likely change would be that "Labour would have to tailor its message more to voters in England", which might lead to more Blairite policies, he says."

Thats sounds to me like just another way of saying that Labour would have to move to centre right to get elected, as they did under Blair- so effectively RUK would no longer have a left of centre party, just two right of centre parties to choose from.

On the subject of the UK nuclear arms-

"Before Faslane was chosen in the 1960s, two other sites were considered - Milford Haven in Pembrokeshire and Devonport in Plymouth. Like Faslane, both have easy access to deep water, but neither is now regarded as suitable for a nuclear weapons site. One solution could be to keep the submarines at Devonport and construct a warhead storage facility near Falmouth, where the submarines could access them. "But this might be a controversial addition to an area with such a popular tourism industry," says Hugh Chalmers, research analyst at the Royal United Services Institute."


Apparently Pembrokhsire and Plymouth are 'not regarded as suitable' due to be being populated areas and tourist areas- ironic given when  Westminster put them in Faslane without any negotiations with Scotland (we didn't have a Parliament to negotiate with then) the placed it within 40 miles of our densest population centre and smack bang in the middle of otherwise beautiful tourist friendly west coast scenery.
Apparently Scottish lives and Scottish tourism jobs are not as important as English ones.

Also there are all the facilities they are not talking about- quite a few of the hills around here are not what they seem!

Things are taking a turn for the worrying- Cameron has been trying to enlist Russia, and Putin in fighting Scottish Independence- given Putin has just passed a law with a five year prison sentence for anyone who calls for independence from Russia this is not a good sign.

Todays Scottish Sun raises some further interesting points in its editorial (the Scottish Sun has odd allegiances it should be pointed out- the parent company News International and the English Sun are Unionist- the Scottish Sun support the SNP, but not Independence, they are also Unionist)-

No10 said Britain was 'extremely interested' in referendum support from Russia over an issue that could have Europe-wide consequences. A Yes vote might give the Catalans and even the Basques, whose homeland stretches into France, big ideas about splitting from Spain. Belgium could be next as the Flemish flex their muscles. And then there is the issue of Britain's nukes and permanent UN seat.
The balance of global politics may shift depending on the vote result- of course Cameron wants it discussed (by the G8 which Russian currently heads).
The referendum countdown is in a new tougher and dirtier phase. You ain't seen nothing yet'- Scottish Sun