.......... to prepare, and be bold enough to believe in ourselves and the future as we determine…not as some after thought hitched up to Westminster.
PM May has boxed
herself, and by implication, us, into a tight corner, sealed with a couple of
handshakes, Trump, that visit, Erdogan in Turkey and that arms deal. It cannot
be anything other than sheer desperation brought on by a lack of economic
pre-planning for a post-Brexit state, that caused PM May and her government to
push for an early state visit by President Trump. And the notion of ‘unintended
consequences’ never once crossed the mind of anyone in the rUK government?
No matter that
the national petition to withdraw the invite has forced its way on to the
Parliamentary timetable, the date for the debate being set as February 20th,
it will be very difficult if not impossible for the UK government to
downgrade the visit from ‘state’ to ‘official’. From what we have seen of
Trump, a ‘carrot’ of the state visit postponed until later will be
unacceptable. So, the UK is stuck with him, his entourage, his demands:
no to Prince Charles, but yes to the obligatory horse drawn carriage. Perhaps
HM has some old nags somewhere (no I am not referring to family hangers-on)
that can do no more than amble along at a very slow pace, up the Mall, that
tree lined avenue crowded with protesters and their placards. You must admit
that many of those seen on Monday 30thth January across Scotland (and yes, the
rest of the world, too) were real crackers. Have those same powers-that-be
considered the other ‘unintended consequences’ of potentially exporting Trump
up to us and Balmoral? Have they forgotten Farage on the High St in Edinburgh,
the pub and taxis fiasco? I can see a wee daunder up to Balmoral, placards,
protesters and more pussy hats: a fine walk in the country side you could yet
provide us with, PM May!
But whilst this
is of importance, the EU question is more so when set in the context of the
love-in trade deals being pursued by the PM with Trump and Erdogan. Where next
one fears, with whom, and what would we be offering up this time? It’s a
sair feicht right enough when we see the likes of Ken Clarke in Parliament, 31st
Jan, outlining why he will vote against the government and with the SNP. This
is what a sound opposition should look like, seeking consensus, building allies,
pursuing common interests. It is was correctly rumoured that even Ian Murray
would vote against his party whip, leaving just wee Mundell running after his
London masters.
The Scotland we
want to be in the future with regards our socio-economic well-being and
international positioning is obviously at odds with Westminster and won’t
be achieved within this unequal union. As we continue to see our nation
disregarded, thrown some ‘scraps’, a Commission here or there, now and then,
some glib phrases and empty promises, the point is...when will we say
enough is enough?
That second
referendum is coming, have no doubt. But if pro inde parties need to wait for
the starting gun to be fired, we don’t. Those meetings, assemblies, discussion
groups, that grass roots movement, need to regain that earlier momentum. We
need to take the vision of our inde Scotland, and demonstrate across the whole
spectrum including the £, our foreign policy, a food policy, a citizens
income even, that a different Scotland is possible.
We have to be
bold enough to evidence and deliberate alternatives that show a Scotland
changing for the better as shaped by us, and not Westminster can be gained. So
now, it’s time to challenge those who don’t agree with us to demonstrate what their
vision of a future Scotland looks like.
They can’t and
they won’t, since they know full well that our future will be no more than a
forgotten foot note, the negated part of an unbalanced union. Very scary since
that means: even more bleak now compared
to the past.
So, as rUK
scrambles for an identity and the fiscal means to sustain itself, it’s
time to remember other (former) colonies as they watched their resources
continue to be plundered, their people continue to emigrate, their aspirations
wither, their determination falter.
That second
opportunity when it comes is all that we will have. Indeyref2 is it…we’ll be
laughed off the pitch if we vote no and then try a third time…..**remember
Quebec. October 30, 1995, and that slim majority that said 'no'!
Now’s it's our time to prepare, and be bold enough
to believe in ourselves and our future as we determine…not as some after
thought hitched up to Westminster.
** Quebec sovereignty referendum
Do you agree
that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to
Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of
the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on
June 12, 1995?
Acceptez-vous que le Québec devienne souverain, après avoir offert formellement au Canada un nouveau partenariat économique et politique, dans le cadre du projet de loi sur l'avenir du Québec et de l'entente signée le 12 juin 1995?
Acceptez-vous que le Québec devienne souverain, après avoir offert formellement au Canada un nouveau partenariat économique et politique, dans le cadre du projet de loi sur l'avenir du Québec et de l'entente signée le 12 juin 1995?
October 30, 1995 Results | ||||||||||||||||
|
No comments:
Post a Comment