Tuesday 1 March 2005

The Constitution

This letter raises a fascinating question:
Since the announcement of the question to be put in a referendum on the European Union constitution, I am surprised there has not been an intensive public debate, and that should be cause for grave concern to all of us. In Scotland’s case, we have not faced such a serious threat to our national sovereignty since 23 June, 1314. Then, as now, our very liberty and freedom as a people, as a nation, are at stake.
Mr McGill's point is that once Britain joins up to the EU Constitution, Scotland could never become independent. Now I'll forget for the moment that no nation can be meaningfully independent in the EU. What our friends down south don't realise is that the SNP wants Scotland to be just like everyone else, whatever that may be at the time: totally independent in the old days and a typical EU member state now. It's not independence as such that motivates the Nats.

But as Mr McGill has realised, once we sign up to the proposed constitution the chances are that the new Europe will be based on existing member states. So will the normally ultra pro-EU SNP campaign against the EU Constitution? The SNP's website talks about fishing in its section on the EU Constitution but there's a lot more to it than that.

1 comment:

David Farrer said...

Comments made on previous template:

David B Wildgoose
"Transmaritime Province of Canada"... 
What an excellent idea! Only, can it be England who joins? 
We'd be happier out of the EU, and Scotland can then separate from the hated partnership with England by become a vassal state of the French-run EU instead...

2 March 2005, 13:41:48 GMT
– Like – Reply

Andrew Duffin
"Scotland might be wiser to aim to be the Transmaritime Province of Canada." 
What an excellent idea, dearieme. 
We might finally get a few decent hockey teams to watch.

2 March 2005, 12:33:23 GMT
– Like – Reply

Andrew Ian Dodge
Well the British Isles are creeping towards North America anyway (techtonically_. So they would just be jumping the gun a little but at least it would show some forward thinking.

2 March 2005, 12:13:50 GMT
– Like – Reply

Maybe they'll call themselves the Sub National Party.

2 March 2005, 01:11:08 GMT
– Like – Reply

Scotland might be wiser to aim to be the Transmaritime Province of Canada. It would probably retain more independence than in the EU, would have the advantage of a proper federal constitution rather than the irrationality of devolution, would join the majority who speak English, plus it would also be attached to one province with a Roman-derived law code quite like its own viz Quebec. I see only one difficulty....

1 March 2005, 17:28:00 GMT
– Like – Reply

There are 2 good reasons why SNP should be anti-EU.  
Our Fishing Industry 
Greenland pulled out of the EU because the 'Common Fishing Policy' damaged their fishing industry. Greenland is of similar geography to Scotland, has similar natural resources, and has the same kinds of problems with development issues.  
Objective 1 Funding 
With the EU admitting poor ex-eastern bloc countries. The objective 1 funding, will now go into developing them instead of Scotland. Scotland therefore does not have much to gain from the EU at all.  
But their argument is that we will have "more say within Europe".  
Can anyone back up this argument which they are putting forward? Or is it just "hot air" to win votes?

1 March 2005, 14:13:17 GMT
– Like – Reply

Andrew Ian Dodge
I have never quite understood the an independent Scotland in Europe line from the SNP. They obviously have not bothered to read the EU Constitution or even a summary.

1 March 2005, 12:33:18 GMT