FEATURED ARTICLES NO. 59 & 60 No Better Together Thanks is crumbling under the weight of its own rhetoric. Lesley Riddoch says eloquently, It’s the height of the silly season. Unseasonal heatwaves have swept Scotland. Beaches here on the Hebrides are packed. Scots have even been seen swimming... It’s hardly the time for a massive breakthrough in the independence campaign. Yet last week was a turning point – the week in which key narratives in the Better Together campaign began to crumble. Today we highlight two articles of importance. First an article from the Daily Record reporting independence will boost Scotlands long declining shipyards, the opposite to what BT say. Then we have the Scotsman article quoted above with another list of well and truly debunked BT myths. DAILY RECORD ARTICLE - The open letter signed by seven of the famous Upper Clyde Shipbuilders work-in dispute in full Jul 20, 2014 21:45 SEVEN veterans who fought for the UCS outlined their support for an independent Scotland in the hope that it will rejuvenate the Clyde Shipbuilding industry. VETERANS of the famous Upper Clyde Shipbuilders work-in have backed a Yes vote in the referendum. Seven of the central figures in the 1971 UCS industrial dispute have signed an open letter claiming independence would be a boost for Scotland’s declining shipbuilding industry. Related Story: Independence referendum: Figureheads of 1971 Upper Clyde Shipbuilders work-in back Yes vote in open letter Read the letter in full below: Tony Benn with Jimmy Reid on march of Upper Clyde Shipbuilders To the shipbuilders of Scotland, and workers in related industries, As shipbuilders for most of our working lives, veterans of the Upper Clyde Shipbuilding work-in, and long-standing trades unionists, we want to make the case for why a Yes vote is the best choice for our shipyards and the future of our industry. For over a century Scotland’s shipyard workers have been among the most skilled in the world, and the new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier is further testament to our expertise. The UK Government is attempting to portray itself as the protector of shipbuilding in Scotland, but nothing could be further from the truth. Despite the efforts of the trade union movement, shipbuilding has been neglected by Westminster governments, and there is a stronger, brighter future for our shipbuilding industry in an independent Scotland. This is about the future: and after independence, Glasgow yards will continue to receive orders from the UK, because Portsmouth is not suitable for building key vessels, and even Westminster has admitted EU laws don’t stop the UK placing orders in Scotland after Yes. Scotland’s shipyards will also need to build ships for the Scottish navy, and the Scottish Government’s immediate proposals are to procure four Type 26 frigates for the new Scottish navy, while in general defence procurement is increasingly a matter of international cooperation. Increasingly, governments are working together to procure ships jointly. Last year the UK and Australia signed a new Defence Treaty that could ‘pave the way for the long-standing allies to join forces in constructing their next generation frigate’. If it’s good enough for Australia and the UK, why do the politicians at Westminster want to treat Scotland differently? A Yes vote is the start of a great opportunity to expand the kind of ships built on the Clyde. Relying on BAE systems and the MoD alone is not a sustainable future for Scotland’s shipyards. One of the No campaign’s own spokespeople makes this point himself, when he says that ‘If we’re not going to build commercial ships, and all we’re going to build is defence frigates and aircraft carriers, then that’s what keeps us alive here’. But there will be no more carriers from the UK and a much reduced warship programme, leading to job reductions and the consolidation of the Clyde Yards. We say: why can’t Scotland compete with other shipping centres, to build commercial ships? The ambition to expand our shipbuilding and not just rely on the MoD will bring a new lease of life for our shipbuilding - which will also have a positive impact on surrounding areas, supply chains, and the industrial future of a neglected Scottish economy. This is also about the history of the yards. For decades, decisions to close the yards were taken by doctrinaire Tory and Labour governments who disregarded the hopes of people who live here. In 1970 the workforce of these Glasgow shipyards faced the closure of their industry and destruction of their communities. In 1979 Scottish shipbuilding employed around 35,000 people - but by 2012 there were less than 8,000, and the Westminster government aims to reduce jobs further from over 5,000 to 1,500. In short, it remains official Westminster policy to build ships abroad and close Scottish yards: in 2009 the Westminster government required that BAE systems close one or more of Scotstoun, Govan and Portsmouth. It is now official UK policy to ‘build ships abroad’, since the 2005 defence White Paper reversed the policy of only building warships at home. So, the great threat that looms over our shipbuilding industry is the threat from no change, from keeping on the same downward path with Westminster. We believe there can and must be a different way forward - but that depends on bringing economic power to Scotland. Shipbuilding can be at the heart of an independent Scotland’s industry. The social and industrial importance of shipbuilding was promoted and defended by the UCS work-in, and will be promoted again - and with a Yes vote the difference will be that rather than decisions resting at Westminster, they will be in the hands of people and the government of Scotland, which would value the contribution of our industry to the economy of Scotland and would see a more diversified future for the shipyards and skilled workers of the Clyde. Scotland is a world leader in offshore technologies and deep sea engineering, and that can translate into a brighter future for our shipyards too. In an independent Scotland we will have the power to make the most of the opportunities of the future, building on our strengths, reindustrialising our nation, so that our shipyards have a strong future, and shipbuilders are guaranteed secure, fulfilling work. This will happen when power to create the future is in the hands of those who can be trusted with it, the people who value the industry that has been at the heart of Glasgow for a century, the working people of Scotland themselves. We are the people with the greatest stake in getting this right and that means we, rather than politicians at Westminster, will do the best job of growing Scotland’s shipbuilding sector. There will be a sustainable shipbuilding future committed to by the Scottish Government. In solidarity, dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/open-letter-signed-seven-famous-3889002#.U8xBkjEStRz.twitter SCOTSMAN ARTICLE - Lesley Riddoch: Naysayers netting negative reports It seems that voting Yes may be better for our health than sticking to an increasingly sick UK, writes Lesley Riddoch It’s the height of the silly season. Unseasonal heatwaves have swept Scotland. Beaches here on the Hebrides are packed. Scots have even been seen swimming. City streets are quiet. Summer sales are on. Politicians are abroad. Voters are focused on sunscreen, Playstation for the kids and time off in the sun. It’s hardly the time for a massive breakthrough in the independence campaign. Yet last week was a turning point – the week in which key narratives in the Better Together campaign began to crumble. • Get the latest referendum news, opinion and analysis from across Scotland and beyond on our new Scottish Independence website First there was David Cameron’s about-turn over Europe. The prime minister had publicly attacked Jean-Claude Juncker – the EU’s preferred candidate to head the European Commission – as an arch-federalist incapable of “modernising” Europe. Almost as implacable a foe as Alex Salmond, you might say. But Cameron’s “principled and deep-seated” objections evaporated the minute the Luxembourg politician was elected. Within days Cameron was negotiating with Juncker to guarantee a Brit gets the key economic brief in the European Commission even though the likely Tory grandee, Lord Hill, seems reluctant, replying “non, non, non” to an interviewer earlier this year. Ah, well. Cometh the hour, cometh the volte face. The day after the deal was apparently clinched Cameron and Juncker were pictured as big buddies, exchanging awkward-looking “high fives.” Evidently, negotiation with a sworn enemy is possible, when he has the endorsement of a democratic vote. Evidently too, European leaders are unmoved by threats from the British prime minister. Attack, bluster, negotiation and deal are the most familiar dance sequence in world politics. Even frightened Scottish voters are starting to take note. Meanwhile Scotland on Sunday reported that Mr Juncker is actually “sympathetic” to an independent Scotland joining the EU, as another politician from a small member state. Well, well, well. Just a week ago, newspaper headlines were so very different. When Juncker claimed the 28-member EU needed “a break from enlargement” the No campaign insisted his remarks meant Scotland would be kept out in the event of a Yes vote. Almost every paper in the land duly proclaimed this news to be a nail in Salmond’s coffin. Today those claims stand revealed as plain wrong. According to Scotland on Sunday “the hierarchy in Brussels would be unlikely to exclude an independent Scotland from the EU as it is already signed-up to core EU requirements … on gender equality and workers’ rights”. It seems an independent Scotland would be a “special and separate case”, distinct from Balkan applicants which have yet to satisfy all entry criteria. Juncker’s words don’t quite amount to automatic membership – not yet. But they completely scotch the year-long scare story that Scotland would be excluded from the EU. And perhaps that reminds voters of other “lines in the sand” – from Ruth Davidson’s objection to further devolution to George Osborne’s “Hands off the Pound” speech, contradicted a week later by a mystery minister. Secondly, there was concrete evidence that Scottish Labour voters are turning towards a Yes vote. The latest TNS survey (usually unfavourable to the SNP) suggests 28 per cent of 2011’s Labour voters plan to vote Yes – up from 21 per cent over the previous three months once “don’t knows” are stripped out. This backs up anecdotal evidence. At a recent meeting in Maryhill Burgh Halls a young former Labour Party member told me of a phone offer to rejoin the party at a special referendum rate of just £5. He told the canvasser he planned to vote Yes along with his whole family – Labour voters for several generations – and asked how progressive voters could have faith in a party offering the weakest devolution deal to Scots. To his surprise the phone lobbyist agreed. Anecdote is hardly worth repeating until it’s part of a measurable trend. That trend – the collapse of automatic opposition to independence amongst Labour voters – is now gathering pace, thanks to Peter Kilfoyle. The left-leaning former Liverpool Walton MP and Labour minister announced his support for Scottish independence last week, describing it as the first step towards loosening London’s grip on power throughout these islands. He praised the Yes campaign message as “positive and aspirational” and described the No campaign as “very, very negative”. Those comments may reassure Labour voters who worry that a Yes vote would leave English voters in the lurch. Doubtless Labour hope a new celebrity-studded Let’s Stay Together video will tug at the heartstrings. But I’d guess the most earnest pleading from Eddie Izzard has less impact than a few soft words from the truly credible and hitherto non-political former chief medical officer for Scotland, Sir Harry Burns. This weekend he told Radio Scotland that if independence meant “people felt able to engage more with local government, with central government and make choices more easily for themselves then it would improve their health”. He added: “At the moment, decisions being made in England are very different from decisions being made in Scotland. That is very important because I fear for the way the health service is going in England.” Given the number of Scots employed in the NHS, the longevity of Sir Harry’s distinguished career and the venerated position of the NHS in Scotland – his words count for a lot. Finally, it’s becoming apparent that No campaigners are very, very thin on the ground. The Sunday Times reports that BBC Question Time producers sent Better Together advance notice of debate dates to give them “a head start in spreading the news” amongst supporters. The Yes campaign say no similar “heads up” appears to have been given to them by Mentorn Media – the independent company behind David Dimbleby’s network Question Time and BBC Scotland’s independence debates chaired by James Cook. In fact, Yes campaigners apply in droves for any opportunity to speak and question – No supporters don’t. This was apparently the case for the audience in the BBC Scotland Orkney debate where I was a panellist. Doubtless that’s why despairing producers feel compelled to give Better Together extra time to drum up trade in the interests of securing a balanced audience. Blame not Aunty, or even her indy producers – blame the relentlessly negative nature of the Better Together campaign and the consequent lack of enthusiasm on the ground. Sooner – not later – this hotly-denied Enthusiasm Gap will matter. And then, in hindsight, this quiet, hot midsummer week may prove to have been pivotal. scotsman/news/lesley-riddoch-naysayers-netting-negative-reports-1-3482713
Posted on: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 10:07:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015