Statement: How We Won And How We Will Win

We know that you are completely exhausted and utterly heartbroken. We are too. On face value we lost, but there is more to the result than meets the eye and this was anything but a fair fight. Two years ago, we started off with Yes on a poll of 25% and yet we ended up with 45%. The sheer resilience of the Yes movement in the face of the full might of the British state, corporate and media power, that was designed to demonise, smear and alienate anyone who chose to side with it will not die down. We’ve been looking straight into the eyes of the British establishment, and we don’t think much of what we see sneering back at us.

From the very beginning, the then ‘Better Together’ turned ‘UKOK’ turned ‘No Thanks’ campaign threw every toy out of the basket, played every dirty trick in the book, and ran a campaign based on negativity and scaring the population into thinking that we were not actually capable of running our own affairs. What we were faced with was a campaign based on stifling engagement, dumbing down politics and deadening thought whilst portraying a No vote as the rational, educated and realistic option.

One of the most heartbreaking moments in the campaign will be a familiar one for many. Knocking on doors and being confronted with an elderly person who had postal-voted No because they were told that they would lose their pension. The No campaign had shamelessly managed to convince people that, in the 14th richest country in the world, we could not afford pensions. The fear tactics employed were sickening. They threw everything under the sun at us, but not once did it dampen our spirits. We canvassed, we danced, we wrote, we sang, we campaigned. And we will continue to do so.

Aside from the fear tactics, this was a campaign aspiring to deaden thought, simplify politics and close minds. #PatronsingBTLady proved an excellent illustration of such, as was the ‘I love my family, I’m saying No Thanks’ billboards, and let’s not forget the ‘independence stresses me out’ stress balls handed out at freshers fayres. This is how they see us. They think we are passive, disinterested, selfish and stupid. In contrast, National Collective toured the country on Yestival, Radical Independence knocked on tens of thousands of doors in a day on their Mass Canvasses, tens of thousands of activists reached out to apathetic communities through local groups, Generation Yes ran open platforms on social media where young people could ask us anything – the entire Yes movement was about encouraging people to think and imagine.

Despite the ‘Better Together’ campaign being what is unquestionably one of the most incompetent political campaigns in the history of British politics, what hindered the steady surge to Yes was a largely compliant mainstream media. For example, a Guardian journalist sent us sarcastic e-mails refusing to publish details of a list of 1,300 prominent artists and creatives who had signed a letter backing a Yes vote, Dr John Robertson’s academic work proved the evident systematic bias of the BBC, and we were constantly demonized as anti-English separatist nationalists and, at times, ‘fascists’ despite many of us being English, and some of us knowing the journalists personally. If they cannot win through an honest factual campaign, what does this say about their case?

Aside from the blatant smearing of anything Yes, the press did something significantly more sinister. They controlled the dissemination of information, closed the space for Yes voices to be heard, and thus facilitated and legitimised the scaremongering onslaught from the No campaign. How many times did you hear that ‘there are just too many unanswered questions’, despite the questions being answered? How many times did you hear that people were voting No because they didn’t like nationalism, despite us not being nationalists? To suggest that British identity is in no way nationalistic derives from a neo imperialist mindset. How many times did you see Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond compared to Dennis Canavan? How many people do you honestly think were aware that Salmond wasn’t the leader of Yes? This was most evident during the last week of the campaign, when we saw the Telegraph stating that voting Yes was an insult to dead soldiers and their families. The establishment’s compliant media was the cherry on top of the cake; a systematic abuse of power.

Did we let this deliberate misrepresentation and demonisation take us down? No. We became the media. Stephen Paton released his #IndyRef weekly reviews, websites like National Collective and Bella Caledonia became a space for underrepresented Yes voices to be heard, and we took to social media to overcome the smear and spread our progressive visions. We should point out here that the Sunday Herald, in supporting Yes, demonstrated courage throughout this movement. It’s not easy to go against the tide of mainstream media opinions and portrayals. The Yes movement should be incredibly proud of our ingenuity and tireless determination and we mustn’t let it dwindle.

Within the political landscape of the No campaign, Scottish Labour provided the front whilst the Tories pulled the strings and supplied the funds. If they were honest democrats, Scottish Labour should have held an election within their party regarding which stance to take on the referendum. The Scottish Green Party for example voted on it, and maintained that members who supported No could speak freely on the matter. This was the first indication that Scottish Labour were about to ostracise those demonstrating autonomy in their party. And boy did that happen. They were openly seen and heard mocking Yes supporting Labour members at their party conference.

Despite Scottish Labour supporting a No vote, around 38% of their voters supported Yes. The Scottish Labour Party ignored their own supporters, and instead blindly persued an agenda that panders to the Labour Party in Westminster, a party that is out of touch with the people of Scotland and one that they have overwhelmingly rejected. One of the results of this is that we are now witnessing memberships of the SNP, the Scottish Green Party and the Scottish Socialist Party skyrocket overnight. Scottish Labour have risked alienating 38% of their own vote in Scotland to preserve a failing Westminster elite. This highlights how little regard they have for the Scottish political landscape. True power, they believe, lies at Westminster.

Taking all of this into consideration, and acknowledging that we were challenging the full force of the British establishment, their corporate might and their compliant media, we did bloody well. If we were at the forefront of a campaign with that level of influence, power and money, we would see a 55% as an international embarrassment.

Part of the reason that we saw the groundswell of grassroots activism that we did is because there was a deadline, a common shared goal for September 18th 2014. Although the deadline has been removed, we still have that shared aspiration. The question now is how to we encapsulate and maintain the momentum of this progressive, diverse, grassroots movement?

The first means of achieving this is clear. The vast majority of the mainstream media have demonstrated their complete lack of autonomy and level of compliance to the British establishment and the corporate elite. We need to create and preserve alternative media channels. But there is little point in creating them as a protest to the mainstream media. These alternative channels must become the mainstream. To do so requires working together. There are some utterly brilliant and resourceful people in this movement. It’s time to unite.

Secondly, we need to organise ourselves with the common aim of holding Westminster accountable to the promises that they made to us. This starts with their pledges for further devolution. We expect that this won’t happen. 1 in every 4 No voters casted their vote under the promise of further devolution. If these promises fail to transpire, we will seek to secure a date for the next referendum on Scottish independence. We have various options as to how we can help make this happen, and we will update you on this later should it be required.

Thirdly, as stated above, the Yes movement seeks to make people think. It is our duty to continue to create a politically engaged, educated electorate. What Westminster want is a Yes movement that is so utterly deflated that it regresses into the shadows, it stops dreaming, it stops imagining that another Scotland is truly possible. There is a reason why the likes of Rupert Murdoch expressed concern at the influence of progressive Yes groups in Scotland.

We simply cannot afford to let our beautiful movement regress. 1.6 million of us stood up and dared to dream. We lost by the equivalent of the population of a small city. We can win this, we must win this, we will win this. When you get a popular revolution driven by hope and optimism like this, that energy will not dissolve into nothing. It can only grow. In the aftermath of a normal election, the losing party is disheartened and their supporters deflated. The difference here is that the whilst the official No campaign has finished and will no doubt try to delete all evidence of it ever existing, people still make the Yes movement and we will continue to campaign and dream. We will always put hope over fear.

National Collective had made plans to continue the Yes movements legacy of a politically engaged and educated electorate, regardless of the result. We will be announcing details of this shortly.

Keep imagining a better Scotland.

Written on behalf of the National Collective team by Miriam Brett (@miriambrett) and Ross Colquhoun (@rosscolquhoun)

Photo: John Duncan / Documenting Yes

email

There are 212 comments

      1. James

        I think you will find Scotland LOST!!!! All the NO vote did was allow for Westminster to continue with all its austerity cuts, privatisation of the NHS and prevent education being free to the masses and more…..sheesh they are even backtracking on the “more powers” didn’t take long either 9hrs I believe, but people of Scotland bought into that, and sent a message to Westminster to do wit us what they will!!!!

      2. Ian Lowe

        The No vote was carried because of the fraudulent promise of “devo max” at the twelfth hour. The first deadline of the Timetable has now passed, and nothing has been done. the Tories and Labour are now pretending that it was just a misunderstanding. If they renege on the deal, then the referendum result is null and void. We will be back.

          1. no dress rehearsals

            Will the Bank of England collapse overnight if Scotland leaves? Not far off it. Why are people who are against Scotland having her independence so aggressive? Would it be because they’re dependant? I’d say yes, they’ve created a huge national debt in a very short time, haven’t stopped spending or building their super city and they need someone to fund them. They are used to the donor being us!

      3. Philip

        Lost the vote, yes. Everyone lost out on the opportunity of a life time. That will become obvious in the very near future. I’ve already seen many who voted no come out saying they regret their decision.

        1. rollo_tommasi

          You’ll be fertiliser in the ground by the time the next vote comes up and by then independence for Scotland will be the last of your worries.

  1. David Park

    Fantastic news, folks. I have one particular media idea I have been thinking over for a time. I feel it could be a (cliché alert) game changer. Thanks for your unceasing, inspirational efforts.

        1. Jonathan Henderson

          Yeah I have come to a similar conclusion. In which case we get voices from the grassroots organisations in among the SNP ranks. A kind of bridging of the gap between professional politics and people politics. Strength and unity.

        2. Will Pickering

          We need to reach out beyond Scotland though. As power reorients back to Westminster, we need a party that can mobilise the “can we come too?” vote in parts of England where there’s no valid left party. Something called Common Weal or National Collective can do that in a way that a party with Scottish in the name probably cannot.

    1. RosieH

      Excellent article/summary of an outstanding campaign.
      I worry that political parties get too big. How about the creation of interest groups and/or movements instead so as to create a richer mixture around Scotland and at Holyrood. I’m imagining being a member of several groups or movements rather than being tied into one political party.

  2. Kye

    Words can not describe the utter despair that gripped my heart and head, the thought of what now could come filled both with dread.

    The suffering, poverty pain throughout our land, we fought long and hard, but apparently could not withstand.

    Fear is a fickle devil and tricks the wisest of us all, so too was it that our people’s determination and courage did finally fall.

    We closed our minds to that which could have been, we saw it for a flickering moment, but a moment was all that had been seen.

    So yes, despair did indeed grip our heart, thinking of what will happen to our beloved country, before we could finally start.

    Some now waver at the task we have within our many hands, they look away, not forward, at what could become of our Scotland.

    But do not despair, it’s a passing, fleeting moment within our many life times, to leave the task at hand would surely be but a crime.

    I envision a Scotland were all are equal and justice rules the law, no longer must we wait for special moments simply to see democracy thaw.

    Thaw the icy sheet that’s held it captive after so many centuries and years, a day when families do not enter food banks and shed unneeded tears.

    I envision a Scotland where all are welcome each and any given day, the matter of your accent shall never come into doubt or play.

    Say you’re foreign, not from our land, but came here to be here with us in our finest days, with us you came to stand.

    I envision a Scotland without worry or self loathing and doubt, where we hold the corrupt responsible with our heavy voting clout.

    I and we envision our land, as what we could hope for, we but hope everyone understands.

    We long for the day when become the shining light, to show the British isles, how things can finally be done ever so right.

    So yes I despair with both my head and my heart.

    But do not be confused, this is but where we start.

    1. Christopher Glen

      Is this a poem? If it is, it is as crap as the Yes camp’s political and economic arguments are. That’s why you lot lost. No-one wanted Scotland to go down the economic plughole. And most of us feel connected with others in these islands and proud to British. Now get over, and learn how to write better!

      1. Dave Soulsby

        YOU are speaking like a moron and an uneducated fool Christopher!
        You and your sheep like friends who want to be ruled by public school boys the house of lords and have your wealth stolen by the big banks need to get an education and stop believing the poop that you are fed. If you cant or wont then please stop spouting your ignorant uninformed views to the world. You are making yourself look even stupider than I am sure you are.

    1. Loos Eason

      No we don’t, simply join the SNP. Give them all your support for a landslide at the next election. The rest will absolutely shit themselves!!

    2. Derick Tulloch

      The first target is 2015 and that will be under first past the post. We need to consolidate around a shared platform and realistically that must be around, but not necessarily only, the SNP. We need to marginalise the British Labour Party representation in Scottish politics as we did the blue Tories before them. Translate Thursday’s Yes vote into votes for an agreed candidate in every constituency and we have a majority of Scottish MPs.

      Different strategy for the Scottish Parliament in due course but the aim must be the same: reduce Unionist representation to the absolute minimum

      I was full of grief yesterday. Today I have hope. This is not 1979 and we will not be crushed for a generation. This is our land

  3. Ian Brannan

    I am utterly fuc*ing angry at the result, the NO Campaign blatantly lied

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/keep-em-peeled/

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/fooled-you-twice-suckers/

    According to Ashcroft 1/4 of Scots voted NO because of the promise of extra powers, that is 500,000 enough to have swung the vote to YES. As far as I’m concerned the Unionist parties breaking their promises renders the whole result invalid. Scots should not accept the NO result we need to take to the streets and protest and demand either another referendum or independence.

    1. rollo_tommasi

      His comments on the elderly voters were disgusting.

      Sooner this creep and his heinous website slink away into obscurity the better.

        1. Dave Soulsby

          Ian, I agree mate but don”t tell people to piss off,
          It brings us down to their level and plays into their hands We can all see that Rollo the German is a ranting mouthpiece of stupidity. not worth the reply mate. Lets stay poss and proud. Something they will never be

          1. Kevin Waddington

            So you can’t tell someone to piss off, but you can call them a “ranting mouthpiece of stupidity”??? And that’s positive and proud?

          2. Dave Soulsby

            I said to a fellow Yes voter to stay positive and be proud of his views,
            You again continue your ill informed stupid rant!

          3. Kevin Waddington

            Once again Dave you lower yourself to the supposed Better Together’s level. You put down anyone else’s views that oppose your own, which is for the most part why the NO campaign seemingly had little following. Not once have I insulted anyone about their views on independence and have stated clearly my own opinions without resorting to intimidation.

            Maybe I am wrong in some of the opinions I have based my opinions, but instead of put downs like “check your facts before posting”. Put across your views and maybe some people will listen.

            Can’t have debates on put downs or is this site only for venting frustrations?

          4. Dave Soulsby

            Kevin, you attacked me for saying to someone not to swear. as it brings down the debate! I am sure that if you read Rollos comments you to will see that they are gloating and triumphalist, not informed opinion. You made a statement about the vote count of the youth vote that was incorrect, Hence my comment, not put down, About checking facts. I also believe that we all have a right to our opinions. However any opinion is only as strong as the facts it is based on. I am happy to put over my views on how to move toward a better independent Scotland and why I feel we can not achieve the type of society we want within the constraints of the UK. There are many good factual views on this site from many different points of view which I read with relish. I am sorry you thought I was just being an ignorant reactionary that was not my aim. I will try to write more of my views in future rather than reacting to nonsense, I take your point it is not productive

      1. Ian Brannan

        His website serves the public good in that it holds the Unionist politicians to account for their lies, something that the mainstream media won’t do. He’s right about the elderly most of them sacrificed the young with their selfish no votes.

        1. rollo_tommasi

          Elderly people tend to be wiser and saw through Salmonds drivel. I’ll bet most of them didnt fancy watching their savings and pensions they’d worked their whole lives for wiped out with a YES vote.

          Besides the whole 79% of young people voting for independence was apparently based on a sample of 14 people.

          1. Ian Brannan

            ” I’ll bet most of them didnt fancy watching their savings and pensions they’d worked their whole lives for wiped out with a YES vote.”

            No the elderly were conned by the NO campaign’s lies, like the statement above. You have absolutely no evidence that this would have been the case. The selfish bas*ards will be the first ones to complain when free elderly care, free bus passes are axed as a result of Westminster cuts – http://referendum.holyrood.com/majority-conservative-mps-oppose-maintaining-barnett-formula

          2. rollo_tommasi

            Accusing an entire demographic of being selfish bastards??

            For christ sakes listen to you man!!! What if it had been the young or the English voters or ethnic minorities that swayed the vote? what then??

            I know your are disapointed but we need to move on, accept the vote and all start working to heal the divisions.

          3. Christopher Glen

            Rollo – you are wasting your time with these economic idiots. Note too how it is always someone else’s fault The whingeing never stops!

          4. The Hairy Caber

            And other than MSM, where did you suggest these ill informed people seek answers? The reason I see that the older generation voted as they did, is because they do not have the need or desire for a digital medium. They believed, as they have been led to believe all their life that the BBC, Times, Independent; etc all tell the truth. The young, as proved; were less easily hoodwinked by the establishment. I think had they not opened up the vote to 16 – 17 yo, the damage would have been a whole lot worse.

          5. Philip Richmond

            The young, with their computers and smart phones, had the advantage of such objective and rigorous sites as wingsoverscotland and a fat lot of good it did them. It amazed me what wild conspiracy theories and fantasies I heard talking to Yes supporters on the street. For instance I heard that Scotland has 2/3rds of the world’s oil and that it’s being hushed up. I often felt as if I was talking to people who had been taken over by a cult and no amount of reason would get through to them. As for 16 and 17 year olds -have a look at the data tables from the final yougov poll. 16-24 yr olds voted 50/50 which suggests 16 and 17 year olds voted NO given the tendency of 25-35 yr olds to vote YES.

          6. rollo_tommasi

            You’re absolutely right Christopher. Can’t help still being f***king seething with these idiots despite getting a NO vote.

          7. Dave Soulsby

            Glad your seething I hope your hate and negitivity eats you up its got you swearing already. Thats what happens when no one believes your lies and narrow minded rants any more all you can do is fume all to yourself.
            AWWWW BLESS

          8. rollo_tommasi

            Actually I’m pleased as punch.

            On Friday night I raised a pint glass and celebrated the Stupid Nasty Party life long dream getting gubbed. It was a great day indeed.

          9. Dave Soulsby

            Well Rollo I don’t support the SNP as we saw in the Yes campaign we are a diverse group of people who want a better world for our children. The Westminster government are totally unrepresentative of the people who vote them into power.
            You may think this is ok for you but other people think we need to change the world for the better and give control back to the people.
            Cheers! enjoy your pint and your smug gloating its all you have.

          10. rollo_tommasi

            If you really think ANY politician in Westminster, Holyrood or anywhere else is going to provide that then I feel sorry for you.

          11. Dave Soulsby

            Rollo I really dont need you to feel sorry for me or my view point. Is this the best comment you have? Can you not debate at least the points on both sides or do you really have so much contempt for 1,600,00 fellow Scotts?

          12. rollo_tommasi

            I have contempt for anyone who tries to break up my country and seperate me from my family and friends in Wales, England and Northern Ireland.

            Sorry.

          13. Terrymac

            “Separate you from your friends in Wales, England and N. Ireland”? What on Earth are you talking about? You think you’re the only one with friends in the rest of the UK? You need to lay off the drink pal! In what UNIVERSE would Scotland being an independent nation prevent you from traveling? You’re going from the ridiculous to the sublimely ridiculous in short order! Your lack of imagination is remarkable!

          14. Terrymac

            Ehm….WHAT? Well YOU clearly think Westminster politicians are the bees knees! Why else did you vote for them? Do you have the first clue what you’re talking about?

          15. Terrymac

            It wasn’t the SNP that got “gubbed” you idiot. Voting for independence WASN’T voting for the SNP. I voted Labour all my life, but never again. They sold us down the river to maintain their Westminster careers.

          16. Terrymac

            Your pal Chris can’t even get his sums right on the vote! So why would anyone listen to his opinions on the economy? But then again, you’re the guy who pulled “14 people” directly out of his fundament! The two of you are well matched! I smell a romance in the air! Ha ha ha!

          17. Terrymac

            You know, there’s only one thing worse than a bad loser, and that’s a bad winner. Seeth away to your heart’s content. The only one who cares is yourself!

          18. Dave Soulsby

            Christopher,
            It is clear that the UK governments and their sheep like supporters are the economic idiots where have you been for the last few years. You are either blind, or ignorant to the economic state of the UK thanks to Westminster. It is you who are truly wasting your time we are not going to go away or stop our fight for a better Scotland that will stand as a beacon of hope and prosperity in the world.
            Get ready for phase 2 :-}

          19. Christopher Glen

            I pity your economic ignorance Dave. It’s just a good job that the vast majority of Scots did not vote for a party that would have left Scotland prey to the ravages of the international currency markets. There would have been a terrible reckoning. Did you not notice the money markets rose rapidly with the No result? Did that not make you put 2 and 2 together? Probably not…

          20. Jenni Adam

            1: The ‘ravages of the international currency markets’ would have affected the UK as well as an Independent Scotland, being as we share a currency – regardless of whether there was formal permission. So the No campaign was about protecting the Uk rather than acting in Scotland’s best interests.

            2: Starting with less debt – which was absolutely going to be the case – than the Uk currently has, and greater resources per capita, would have given us a healthier economy. FACT. And a very simple one at that.

            3. If Scotland truly did ‘cost’ the Uk money, why on earth would they fight so hard to keep a fiscal liability.

            4. Do try and join the dots.

          21. Christopher Glen

            Jenni that is touching, but I don’t think you realise how money markets react to a country without a LOLR when things get tough – and it would soon have been that way in an iScotland with a budget deficit. I also think you have no idea of how interconnected the UK economy is. Fortunately more people realised that it is – and that the real benefits to Scotland are to be found in the Union.

          22. Jenni Adam

            I’d have thought markets would be less concerned with an iScotland with less than 200 bill in debt and no means of bailout, than they would with rUK with almost 4.5 trillion in debt, having just lost 10% of their GDP and access to the bulk of oil revenues.

            But what do I know?

          23. Christopher Glen

            Well, the markets rose on the back of the No vote. That tells you all you need to know about what they thought of the Yes option!

          24. Christopher Glen

            No, it tells you that the markets liked the idea of the UK staying together. In other words, they did NOT like the Yes option.

          25. Terrymac

            The “vast majority” eh? HA HA HA! And you’ve got the cheek to accuse others of “economic ignorance”! The last time I looked 55% was not a “vast majority” nor anything like it!
            You don’t even have a grasp of basic maths so why would anyone listen to your opinions on the economy!

          26. Terrymac

            Right. So where’s this “vast majority” you’re havering about? You need to take a refresher course on primary school level arithmetic, mate.

          27. Terrymac

            See your comment above eh? So simply regurgitating the same shite is your idea of “intelligence”? Ha ha ha!
            So you want to play the percentage game ? Well, GUESS WHAT? The spineless NO’s didn’t even get over the 50 percent mark!!! Only 46.7% of the electorate voted NO!! So how is that a “vast majority”?
            I don’t even need to ask how thick you are! You’ve answered that question most emphatically!

          28. Christopher Glen

            I am afraid you have confirmed my worst suspicions about your lack of reasoning ability. Hope you are not in a job where brains are required…

          29. Terrymac

            I’m afraid you’ve confirmed my worst suspicions about your lack of mathematical ability! Hope you’re not in a job where arithmetic is required! ha ha!

          30. Terrymac

            “Economic idiots” eh? Well we’ve just found another dupe who fell for the fear campaign! Good for you! And what you call “whinging” is what the YES voters call “Standing up for your self against entrenched power”! I suppose Ghandi was a “whinger” too! And Martin Luther King, one of the worst “whingers” of them all, I suppose! You sound exactly like a Scottish Tory to me.

          31. Jeff Le Bowskie

            Most no voters based their vote on self interest, it just so happens they preyed on the elderly like cheap doorstep or telesalesmen

          32. rollo_tommasi

            Mate just keep believing the YES campaign did everything right. Its was the damed bbc, it was the elderly, it was the national newspapers, it was Obama that made the pound and stock market tank and so on and so on.

            It was nothing to do with half baked policies, lies about the NHS, lies about the EU etc etc

            Nothing to do with anyone of that. Nationalists all around the world over are always right and everyone else is wrong.

            You keep believing that.

          33. Jenni Adam

            Lies about the NHS?

            NHS England is already subject to privatisation. When TTIP is signed, which it will be, you can kiss the rest of it goodbye down there. The best chance we had of preventing the same thing happening to NHS Scotland was to separate it completely from Westminster’s control so that it never gets signed.

            Don’t believe me? I give it till six months after the next General Election before the NHS is gone in England.

          34. Terrymac

            What world are you living in? Do you even bother keeping up with current events? You do know the NHS is being systematically destroyed in England, don’t you? You do know the Tories are busy privatising anything they can get their grubby, greedy little hands on, don’t you? So you think the Tories have our best interests at heart, do you? What am I saying…OF COURSE YOU DO! You voted for them!

          35. Terrymac

            Well we’ve already established that you’re just a pathetic sore winner! Something 10 times worse and 10 times more pathetic!

          36. Solletico Ranting

            you have no way of knowing that most no voters voted selfishly.

            with the pie in the sky promises of tax cuts and public spending increases coming form the snp i could say the same about yes voters.

            but i wouldn’t cos it’s a ridiculous over simplification.

          37. Terrymac

            “Moving on” is EXACTLY what this site is about, in case you hadn’t noticed. “Moving on” towards a better, fairer Scotland, something the YES voters stood up for! All the NO voters stood up for was more of the same, with NO imagination, NO guts.

          38. Kevin Waddington

            I think you will find free elderly care, free bus passes, free prescriptions and free tuition fees are all in place because of Scotland’s already devolved powers….the only people who can remove those are Holyrood. Under independence would these still have remained?

          39. Ian Brannan

            “the only people who can remove those are Holyrood”

            Wrong Westminster can force Scotland to remove these by slashing our funding and therefore our ability to pay for them as will happen shortly. http://referendum.holyrood.com/majority-conservative-mps-oppose-maintaining-barnett-formula

            “Under independence would these still have remained?”

            Yes and they would have been well funded for example independence would have allowed us to save:

            – £800 million a year on defence

            Not just Trident, but all of the other grossly excessive expenditure currently attributed to the Scottish budget in order that the UK can “punch above its weight on the world stage” by going around bombing people. Scotland’s current nominal defence budget is £3.3bn a year. The SNP planned to spend £2.5bn.

            – £50m a year saved on Westminster

            Scotland’s contribution to running the Houses Of Parliament.

            – £200m a year saved on HS2

            The UK government’s latest figure for the cost of slightly faster rail journeys between London and Birmingham is £42.6bn. If you make the (enormously optimistic) assumption that the project comes in on budget, Scotland’s population share of the cost will be £3.6bn. HS2 is due to open in 2032, so divided by 18 years that’s £200m a year.

            That’s already more than a BILLION pounds we could have saved on Scotland’s budget every single year and that is not even counting the oil revenues that would have went to an independent Scottish Treasury.

          40. Kevin Waddington

            Where would Scotland’s share of the national debt fit into those costings/savings?

            The question as I see it on defence is where are the troops coming from? The current UK forces were to be given the choice of staying put and forming part of Scottish defence or remaining with RAF/RN etc in which case they would be deployed down south. This would potentially leave Scotland defenceless with few experienced troops.

            You also had to factor in the expense of pensions and benefits, passport control, DVLA, HMRC plus a host of other things, which would wipe out most of those savings.

            How about dualling of the A9 or the new Forth Road bridge? Would Westminster continue to have funded that?

            These were some of the things that had to be considered as well as the currency issue, but I don’t recall hearing anything about slashing Scotland’s funding

          41. Ian Brannan

            “the question as I see it on defence is where are the troops coming from? ”

            Soldiers would be easily recruited from the Scottish regiments but more to the point The Royal United Services Institute calculated in 2012 that Scotland could have a “feasible and affordable” armed forces, including a surface fleet of 20 to 25 ships, for slightly over half the current expenditure (£1.8bn rather than £3.3bn). The SNP proposed to spend £2.5bn.

            http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-19955309

            What Scotland really needs are naval and air forces, chiefly to guard the North Sea’s oil rigs (although nobody has ever actually tried to attack them). Unfortunately, within the UK Scotland’s coasts and maritime assets are almost totally unprotected. When a Russian warship ventured close to the Moray Firth in December 2013, the Royal Navy had no vessels to intercept it except HMS Defender, which took a full day to sail from the south of England. http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defence/portsmouth-based-warship-sent-to-shadow-russian-ship-off-scotland-1-5787359 “The missile-carrying Russian warship came within 30 miles of the coast before Christmas. Portsmouth- based HMS Defender was the only ship available to respond due to Ministry of Defence cutbacks and had a tense stand-off with the Russian ship. The Type 45 took 24 hours to reach the coast of Scotland.”

            No matter how you look at it the NO Vote was a disaster for defence in Scotland.

            “You also had to factor in the expense of pensions and benefits, passport control, DVLA, HMRC plus a host of other things, which would wipe out most of those savings.”

            Scotland subsidises the UK and this was admitted years ago – http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/figures-explode-subsidy-myth-scotland-gave-27bn-more-than-was-received-1.406190. A yes vote eould have ensured Scottish revenues stayed in Scotland meaning these services would have been affordable. More to the point a YES vote would have given Scotland access to our vast oil revenues that could easily have funded these services – http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/1039/scottish-west-coast-untapped-oil-and-gas-reserves-worth-trillions/

            ““Mackay says there is evidence of a recovery in output over the next few years. This will be fuelled by North Sea investors enjoying 100% first year capital allowances against present business revenues.

            ‘Both rising output and a falling tax rate will result in rising tax revenues, provided of course that the oil price does not fall out of bed.’

            Mackay points to official forecasts by Oil & Gas UK which suggest an independent Scotland’s revenues in 2017-19 would be almost £32bn, double the £15.8bn forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility.

            The OBR forecast implies that an independent Scotland, on a geographical share (90%) of UK oil and gas revenue in 2016-17 and 2018-19, would receive £15.8bn in tax revenues.

            ‘Assuming DECC [Department of Energy and Climate Change] prices this would rise to £28.1bn,’ says Mackay. ‘Inserting the Oil & Gas UK production forecast raises this to £31.8bn.

            If Danny [Alexander] looks at this he might conclude there is no hole in the Scottish government’s oil predictions but there is a mountain of black gold missing from his.’”

            See here – http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/psdm.jpg

            “How about dualling of the A9 or the new Forth Road bridge? Would Westminster continue to have funded that?”

            England dosen’t fund that AT ALL it comes from Scotland’s yearly block grant budget.

            “These were some of the things that had to be considered as well as the currency issue, but I don’t recall hearing anything about slashing Scotland’s funding”

            The Barnett formula is certain to be scrapped cutting Scotland’s budget by 4bn a year. For example:

            DAVID CAMERON, UK PRIME MINISTER (Con)

            “Asked if it was time to get rid of the formula, Mr Cameron says: “This cannot last forever, the time is approaching … If we replace the Barnett Formula with a needs-based formula, Scotland has very great needs and Scotland will get very great resources.’

            Asked if, therefore, the formula is coming to the end of the road, he replies: ‘Yes, that’s right.’“

            ALISTAIR CARMICHAEL, SECRETARY OF STATE FOR SCOTLAND (Lib Dem)

            “We do want to see Barnett scrapped. We want to see that replaced by what we call a needs based formula.”

            MARGARET CURRAN, SHADOW SCOTTISH SECRETARY (Lab)

            “Margaret Curran, the Shadow Scottish Secretary, said there are a “lot of question marks” about whether devolution has led to the improvements that its supporters claim.

            She also indicated her support for abolishing the Barnett formula, which gives Scots almost £1,200 per head more public spending than the UK average, and replacing it with a system based on need.

            She said: “I do believe that we should allocate public funding on the basis of need and it should not be around just a regional or a national demarcation around that.”

            THE HOUSE OF COMMONS JUSTICE SELECT COMMITTEE

            “The Barnett Formula is overdue for reform and lacks any basis in equity or logic. It creates controversy in all of the constituent parts of the UK. There is controversy in England that the Barnett Formula allows for higher levels of public spending in Scotland from the UK Exchequer and does not deal with different needs in different parts of England.

            We urge the Government to publish its position as a matter of some urgency and to proceed to devise a new formula which is needs based, takes into account regional disparities in England as well as in Scotland and Wales, is transparent and is sufficiently robust to enable long-term planning.”

            THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION, ENGLAND

            “Council leaders in England are to campaign for Scotland’s block grant to be cut. Local government chiefs south of the Border say they are envious of the powers and funding given to a devolved Scotland and have revealed they will push for the UK Treasury to scrap the Barnett formula, the system that gives Scotland more per head of UK funds than it does to England and Wales.

            Sir Merrick Cockell, head of the Local Government Association (LGA) in England, has claimed that his counterparts in Scotland are ‘in wide-eyed disbelief’ at the cuts English councils are having to accept, compared to those they are having to implement.”

            CONSERVATIVE MPS, VARIOUS

            “The renewed debate over Scotland’s place in the Union should trigger a review of its share of taxpayer’s money, Conservative MPs have said.

            Gordon Henderson, the MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey, said uneven public spending was fuelling English resentment at Scotland and undermining the Union the Conservatives are committed to preserving.

            ‘There is increasing resentment within England about this – there is a feeling that we are treated less favourably,’ he added.

            ‘The Barnett Formula is well out of date and needs to be scrapped entirely. If we are a United Kingdom – and I hope we remain so – then we should all receive the same level of support from the Government.’

            David Mowat, the MP for Warrington South, said: ‘We should be looking at the Barnett Formula now, thinking about moving towards a more needs-based formula.’ he added.

            Andrew Selous, the MP for South West Bedfordshire and an aide to Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, highlighted comments from other senior ministers that he said raised doubts about the formula’s future.

            Cheryl Gillan, the Welsh Secretary, said last year that the formula was ‘coming to the end of its useful life’. As a junior Treasury minister, Justine Greening, now the Transport Secretary, also responded sympathetically to calls for reform.

            Mr Selous said: ‘I am very encouraged that two Cabinet ministers have gone on the record to say that the Barnett Formula will not be here for ever. This is something that people in England are concerned about.’”

            MORE TORY MPS (VARIOUS)

            “Almost three-quarters of Tory MPs say that the way public money is distributed around Britain should be reformed. And most believe that the current devolution settlement giving Scotland its own parliament is unfair to England and must change.”

            THE ALL-PARTY PARLIAMENTARY TAXATION GROUP

            “The APPTG echoes the findings of the House of Lords Committee on the Barnett Formula in recommending that a shift is required towards a ‘needs-based’ formula, whereby a ‘dynamic’ and ‘simple, clear, and comprehensible’ system is used to allocate resources to the devolved regions ‘based on an explicit assessment of their relative needs’, calculated ‘per head of population’.”

            RUTH DAVIDSON, LEADER, SCOTTISH CONSERVATIVE PARTY

            “Barnett was only supposed to be temporary… I do think that there will be a review of Barnett after 2014. The ground has shifted since devolution.”

            STRUAN STEVENSON, SCOTTISH CONSERVATIVE MEP

            “The Scottish Conservatives will never have any fertile ground to plough in Scotland as long as we live on a block grant from Westminster. We are the party that can offer efficiency and low tax and a competent government but you can’t do that when you are funded through the Barnett block grant.”

            CARWYN JONES, FIRST MINISTER OF WALES (Lab)

            “Asked if he could see Barnett reformed without touching the current generous allocation of funds to Scotland, Jones said: ‘It would be difficult to envisage a situation where there would be widespread Barnett reform with an independence referendum pending in Scotland.

            The problem has been in years gone by that you can’t address the Barnett Formula unless you address the whole of it. I certainly can’t see it happening before 2014 and the Scottish referendum.‘”

            THE SCOTTISH LIBERAL DEMOCRATS

            “Recommendation 26: The UK should move to an independent, transparent, needs based formula to serve all parts of the UK well and allow fiscal federalism to be sustained in the long term, recognising that the Barnett Formula was only ever intended to be a temporary measure at the end of the 1970s.”

            LORD LANG OF MONKTON (Con)

            “On the Barnett surplus, everyone knows that the basis of the present distribution of funds is out of date. We know that that, too, created an imbalance that can be put right. A fair-minded Scotland would agree. We need an up-to-date measurement of relative need in Scotland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom.” (col. 1365)

            THE TAXPAYERS ALLIANCE

            “The Barnett Formula has a troubled history and has failed to address the extremely unfair situation of English taxpayers heavily subsiding Scotland. Everyone is struggling to make ends meet, and it is long overdue for the Government to lift this burden from taxpayers’ shoulders. English taxpayers want an end to subsidising Scotland”

            THE CALMAN COMMISSION

            “The commission, which officially publishes its report on 15 June, has decided major changes need to be made. Instead of the Barnett Formula it wants Scotland to have taxes raised in the country – including income tax, VAT, stamp duty and inheritance tax – assigned directly to the Scottish budget.

            Significantly, however, experts believe the change will result in a drop in Scotland’s budget – which could lead to cuts in services. The proposals will be seen by some as evidence the commission was a smokescreen to cut Scotland’s budget.

            THE HOLTHAM COMMISSION

            “We believe that Barnett must ultimately be superseded by a needs-based formula. No doubt that will need to be accompanied by an adjustment mechanism since the formula may imply substantial changes to block grants and it would be both disruptive and politically difficult to introduce those rapidly.” (Section 3.9)

            THE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH

            “The introduction of a new system would provide a convenient opportunity to do so, but would entail a substantial reduction in the funding allocated to Scotland.

            It would be open to the Scottish government to decide whether it wanted to raise more revenue from the tax bases available to it to continue to pay for higher levels of public services, or to reduce spending to match that ‘standard’, need-related, level of spending.” (Section 6.2)

            THE DAILY TELEGRAPH

            “The Barnett Formula, under which Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receive more public spending per head than England, has long rankled south of the border. Even Joel Barnett, who was chief secretary to the Treasury when the system was introduced in the Seventies as a temporary measure, subsequently disowned it.

            If the Scots vote to remain in the UK, as we hope they do, it cannot be as a result of a bribe from the English. A few years ago, the Calman Commission recommended scrapping Barnett, reducing income taxes in Scotland and then allowing Holyrood to levy its own rate on top, introducing an enhanced element of accountability and fiscal self-governance.

            Such reforms should be openly debated ahead of the referendum: for the Scottish people are entitled to know that even if they vote to stay in the UK, the current method of financing public spending should not be allowed to continue.”

            THE UK PUBLIC (via The Sun/YouGov)

            “60% of UK taxpayers don’t think it is worth continuing to give Scotland a higher share of state spending than other regions just to keep it in the UK.”

            IAN DAVIDSON MP, CHAIR, SCOTTISH AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE (Lab)

            “Glasgow MP Ian Davidson said the Barnett formula that gives Scotland a bigger share of UK government spending would be lost if the party go for full tax powers for the Scottish Parliament.

            The Labour chairman of the influential Commons Scottish affairs committee said it ‘would undoubtedly be to Scotland’s detriment’.”

          42. noticeyourlife

            the banking fiasco had already done that add this tory not-governments actions theres almost no pension left.

          43. James N M Greig

            I am 63 and during this campaign I have met so many closed and uninformed older minds who refuse (fear) to engage with new media and who spout this. Your first first sentence gives a hint. ‘Elderly people tend to be wiser’ and ‘saw through Salmond’. Bet you object to 16 year olds getting the vote because they are not ‘worldly-wise’ and think this movement is all a plot. Please remember that the young are your future – the ones that will pay for ou.r health care and pay your precious pension.

          44. Kevin Waddington

            Alex Salmond included them in the vote thinking they would vote enmass for independence……maybe take their vote out of the equation and you would have your independence!

          45. Kevin Waddington

            Why else would Alex Salmond change the ruling to allow the 16 & 17 yr olds the right to vote in independence, but NOT in an election?

            It surely wasn’t to give the Better Together campaign a sporting chance!

          46. Dave Soulsby

            I believe that it was to give the people who would be most effected by this result a voice. Why do you think it was a threat to the No vote? I think that the 16 & 17 year olds were fantastic in this whole debate and I hope very much they are given the right to vote in the next Scottish elections.

          47. Richard Gibbons

            SNP and Lib Dems have already stated 16 & 17 yo should have the right to vote in all elections. Alex Salmond didn’t just change the ruling, it was put forward with backing from the Lib Dems in a negotiation and was agreed by David Cameron who signed it off in the Edinburgh Agreement.

          48. rollo_tommasi

            The whole 79% of younger people voted for independence was based upon a sample of 14 people!!!!

            You forget women rejected independence as well. Simple reason is they dont like gambling!!!

          49. Terrymac

            Oh hey! There you are again, pulling that “14 people” rubbish directly out of your anal passage once more! Instead of simply squatting your cheeks over your keyboard, why not leave a link to your imaginary “14 people”! Ha ha!

          50. Dave Soulsby

            Rollo, The older generation are the very people who are responsible for the collapse of the financial system my children and grand children will be paying off the TRAITOR Gordon Browns mess for years. A man who sold off 400 tonnes of OUR,”THATS, YOURS AND MINE.” Gold Reserves to bailie out a private banker in new york at rock bottom price. The deal was brokered by Goldman Sachs the same corrupt bank that bankrupted Greece.
            He is also responsible for the scandal of PFI which when we find out the soon to be published figures We will all be in even more financial mire because it will bankrupt this country. So from a wise old man to an obvious fool get an education before you speak. My old teacher always said empty vessels make the most noise.

          51. Terrymac

            Listen who’s talking about drivel! We live in one of the richest countries in the world, the idea that old people’s pensions would be wiped out in an oil rich nation is utter FANTASY! Lies pumped out by the Westminster fear campaign. And don’t tell me where you pulled that “14 people” tripe from, I shudder to think!

          52. S B REED

            Brown raided the pension funds in 1999 to the tune, in todays value of £118b. They got a 75p rise in their pension. Brown allowed companies to wipe out their pension funds leaving people about to retire with no income! If they did vote that way then I do not think this older generation is wise if they can’t remember what happened to their pensions. They must be stupid, senile or be ready to shuffle off this mortal coil.

        2. KingRog

          I am one the older generation and I agree. My generation let everyone else down. Some of it, especially with people above 80, is understandable. But the majority of my age group acted in a purely selfish manner in my view.

    2. Iain Sinnett

      I have been saying just that even before the votes were cast and speaking to some within the better together crew who agreed on this matter. Actually most of them said if those powers that were promised are not delivered then they will stand shoulder to shoulder with the Yes campaign .

      1. Paul

        I would not take anything any BT campaigner says at face value. The fact that the people you speak off spread the lies and misrepresentation of stats and believed “The Vow”, would suggest they had an inkling it was all rubbish, but were still willing to sell Scotland down the river. So I wouldn’t trust them, or depend on them, turning to Yes next time.

        1. Glenn

          ….I agree Paul,. There’s been a lot made of the idea that half of Scotland has been ‘duped’, but I don’t necessarily think that’s true. I think quite a large proportion (hopefully not enough to maintain the union) were really voting for little more than maintenance of a status quo, WHATEVER form that status quo might take, regardless of new powers, regardless of social welfare etc, etc. The form of the engagement of no voters suggests (to me) that they just aren’t that bothered about the kinds of changes (to social welfare, responsibility, and most important of all, TRUE democracy) that a yes vote would have instigated. The focus on the ‘new powers’ timetable and agenda will become one of yes voters highlighting the shortfalls of the Westminster parties to deliver, and no voters accusing us of being little more than whingers. Some of the people in this country, really, just don’t care. Some of these people are my friends, and I’m having a hard time getting my head around that. It’s the values thing. My STARTING BASIS in this debate was MY VALUES, as far as i am concerned, and everything else came after, that’s who I am. The STARTING BASIS in this debate for the no voters, including my friends, was maintenance of their own situation, and of those they care about, and everything else came after. These are friends of mine that I respect as equals, and I’m finding the question of differences in VALUES, which for me are FAR MORE IMPORTANT than economic considerations, VERY difficult to deal with. Values should not be bartered with, or be capable of being swayed by polotics or economic factors. I’m gutted.

      2. Ian Brannan

        “Actually most of them said if those powers that were promised are not delivered then they will stand shoulder to shoulder with the Yes campaign.”

        Well its time for them to do so, the deadline for the publication of their timetable has now passed, and nothing was done. As far as I’m concerned the referendum result is therefore null and void.

  4. Duncan Fraser

    Yep, still here – eyes dried, looking forward to kicking Danny Alexander out of his safe little seat in the general election with the sharp end of a piper’s brogue. ’45 has a certain resonance in these parts.

    1. KingRog

      The Liberals, for me, are the biggest disappointment of the lot. Danny Alexander and Alasdair Carmichael simply sounded like Tories. This, from members of a party long wedded to the principle of Home Rule.

  5. rollo_tommasi

    What a load of drivel.

    You lost fair and square after two and half years campaigning.

    You dont need independence to help alleviate child poverty or foodbanks.

    1. Ralph Mason

      you have a lot to say, none of it relevant or useful. all this while we have been polite. I still believe that independence won without bloodshed is useless, we are done being nice. Oh and may I ask where do you stay?

      1. rollo_tommasi

        Using bloodshed to get independence. You are welcome to try it if you want to send your cause back 50 years be my guest.

        PS Where I stay is none of your business.

    2. SC1

      “You dont need independence to help alleviate child poverty or foodbanks.”

      It would obviously help if it gave Scotland more powers to compete,
      To attract business and grow the economy.

      Higher growth = more jobs = more taxes that can be spent on fighting poverty.

      More powers are better than Less powers when it comes to growth.

      1. rollo_tommasi

        There would have been bigger cutbacks in the event of a YES vote. The SNP only wanted to tell you this after the vote though.

        Luckily for everyone they never got the chance.

  6. Matthew Martin Hughes

    “We
    need to create and preserve alternative media channels. But there is
    little point in creating them as a protest to the mainstream media.
    These alternative channels must become the mainstream. ” –

    Just one
    point here: we already have this hugely popular
    platform (fB), which although controlled by the establishment – as far
    as they have been able to – still offers a great opportunity to reach
    everyone.

    For example, in Spain, the grassroots citizens’ movement for
    social justice and equality Podemos (“we can”), who are fighting against
    institutionalised corruption in their society (corrupt socialist and
    conservative main political parties, a lack of true democratic
    transparency, a monarchy that has come to be widely perceived by the
    Spanish population as anti-democratic, antiquated and free-loading,
    general media bias, profit-greedy financial institutions and
    corporations, etc….sound familiar btw?
    ) uses fB as one, highly effective, way of maintaining most of their
    supporters informed, who then ‘share the word’ to friends online
    etc..disseminating information of general interest, commenting etc.

    This
    has been one of the reasons why, in the space of just one year since
    their establishment, they are now the 2nd political force, in terms of
    voting intentions, in Spain. And growing. All by levering online social
    media platforms to engage and inform and by presenting an agenda of
    justice, honesty, transparency, respect and equality to a population
    tired of deception, lies, poverty, rampant corporation-driven greed and
    corruption.

    Finally, In relation to The Guardian, I think they probably made an editorial decision not to support Socttish Independence, based on the fear of alienating their English readership. I think they are fully aware of the ‘big picture’ struggle for liberty which is currently occuring in the west, and decided, rightly or wrongly, that is what they would continue to focus on. They have been subject to incredible harrassment since their involvement in publishing the wikileaks cables, plus Edward Snowden’s revelations about massive population-orientated surrveillance operations by western governments. Not trying to excuse them, of course. But I did find their lack of partiality somewhat bemusing, and that’s the only reasonable explanation I can come up with.

  7. stewartb

    We don’t need as a priority a YES or a National Collective PARTY, we need to do the more difficult thing – achieve the continuation of the YES MOVEMENT which binds different political groups and parties together to achieve the clear OUTCOME that we want – self determination for Scotland. The priority is how to sustain the movement. Success, whenever the opportunity for another test comes, will depend on a critical mass, a strong majority, of the electorate sharing a common vision. My sense is that this majority may need to be ‘self evident’ in advance. But there is an exception: we do need a new, strong organisation for those that no longer wish to be part of Scottish Labour. So moving forward, lets take care over too much fragmentation and no factionalism to divert us from this one shared goal.

  8. Teri

    Excellent piece that lifts the spirits and inspires us all to continue. I’ve been trying to evaluate what happened myself and how to outmanoeuvre them next time. First I think we need to examine in every detail how they were operating – you give some fine examples there. They saw themselves at war and used the same strategies as they do when fighting one of their many wars, even down to using the same military codewords for each stage of their campaign. We need someone with an military background to take us through the stages so we know them better than they do.
    We need to look at how we operated too. Were we too open, making it too easy for them to know our every move? Social media is great but we were all being well trolled. We need a secret means of communication of our own – codewords etc.
    Also the poor are feeling very let down. We built their hopes, gave them the dream and it was dashed on Thursday. They just go back to being what they were – poor and with little hope. We need to think what we do in the meantime for them; we cant just leave them to be poor till our next referendum.
    I’ve added these as just a couple of things to think about. My head is buzzing as I think back over the time. More will come soon. I hope you find what I say as valid and worth thinking about. Thanks Teri

  9. Lisbon Lion

    That a grass roots campaign ran the political class and their media outlets so close was incredible, this movement for change must go on. A majority under 65 said Yes, History is on our side. Please keep us all informed about future plans as there is a huge appetite to take on the Westminster Dinosaurs again. God Bless you all and never forget the poor!
    Tornaog

  10. James Segwell

    Whether or not anyone may think it’s just porky pies it’s my duty to report what’s being reported elsewhere. The head of Russia’s election observation body has sensationally
    accused the British government in Westminster of rigging the Scottish
    Independence vote. Also this link from the Guardian newspaper: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/19/russia-calls-foul-scottish-referendum.

    Please be patient when watching this next clip, some words of unknown truths I believe: https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10204763346824452.

    Many of you may have seen youtube clips showing some vote counters using what seems to be dubious tactics to boost the NO vote as well as a trolley with a NO (vote) sign filled with many YES vote papers.

    And yes many of the third generation folks were fooled into voting NO with the pension tactic scare. I also believe many NO voters simply did not want to change the cosy marriage of convenience relationship, scared of the ‘unknown’ and instead staying put on the comfortable ‘sofas’.

    We should battle on with intelligent persistence.

  11. Julie McKenzie

    Reading this made my heart beat a wee bit faster. Inspirational words for our soon to be re-energised beautiful, Yes/45 movement. Thanks National Collective X

  12. Luke Mackle

    What a load of self-congratulating trite. Don’t conflate an educated electorate with the Yes campaign, nor assume the responsibility for you to further educate that electorate. It is the responsibility of the entire of Scottish society, and British society, to educate and engage its citizens. One of the heaviest criticisms to be levied against not just Westminster but Holyrood is that it has taken such the prospect of such radical change to do this. There are a huge number of people who voted no who want the same as many who voted yes, but chose a different route to these ends. The priority shouldn’t be converting either side, thus perpetuating the the schisms we’ve seen emerge, but bringing both together in the realisation of their common goals. If the possibility for this has been extinguished within the framework devo-max provides (which, before someone points out that these powers have yet to be delivered, they remain a far less tenuous prospect than those proposed in the White Paper), we can reengage the referendum question.

      1. Luke Mackle

        What do I mean by devo-max? I’m presuming that you know what maximum devolution entails, so I won’t do you the injustice of spelling it out…

        If Scotland is given the greater autonomy promised, then many of the societal failings that underpin much of the sentiment behind separation from Weatminster can be tackled. What’s more, they can be tackled without it being a detriment to those suffering from similar injustices across the UK. The worst thing we can do now is to perpetuate a sense of martyrdom amongst the yes campaign, or propagate the them and us sentiment pervading the country. It’s regressive and doesn’t help anyone.

        1. ronaldma

          Luke, I think the point KingRog is making is this: no party is proposing devo-max. All that is being proposed by the Westminster parties is minor adjustments to income tax. Devo max is fiscal autonomy. One of the most distressing things about the whole debate is the conflation of devo max with ‘a little bit more devo’.

  13. Dair Allan

    Inspiring words and full of hope and worth absorbing. The most important thing about keeping going is to combat the clear narrative a biased BBC is already peddling – that the question is “settled”. The question is not settled, nearly half the people of the country want Independence and that will not ever go away. While many want it, it is always on the agenda and regardless of what the BBC says, will always be open for a new referendum in every single electoral cycle where a plurality demands it in Holyrood Elections.

    It is important tho, to not only hold the other side to account and pressure. Surely there is a strong need for the wider Yes group to focus on tactical voting patterns. Demand full support for SNP candidates at Westminster (albeit on a “get us the Balance of Power and we can offer a coalition with a party offering Full Devolution of All Revenues). And in return expect the SNP to share a platform with the Greens on a “SNP Constituency / Green List” campaign message for 2016. That could ensure a complete gutting of Labour at both Westminster and Holyrood.

    If All Revenue Devolution is gained, huge amounts can be done. But most importantly after 2016 the SNP/Greens need to deliver another referendum to the people if they get plurality (which they must be a certainty to achieve given the likely Labour collapse). What we want, what we all want can only be achieved by ruthless strategising, even if that means voting opposite to how we feel or believe when it will support the drive to Independence and Independence SOON. Everyone must be willing to do this because it is the only way to achieve what we all want.

    A better Scotland.

  14. STEU

    As an EU national about to relocate to Glasgow from south of the border, I was (to put it mildly) deeply disappointed with the result.

    In a Facebook group that was particularly useful in convincing other EU nationals to register first and then vote Yes, this was my reaction early on the 19th: “The people have spoken. Even so, quite disappointed with the referendum results in Scotland. An opportunity, for both Scotland and the rest of the UK, has been lost – permanently, in my view. I just hope that, in the coming months and years (decades?), those who voted No won’t come to bitterly regret their decision…”.

    Reading some of the comments, I must say I believe some people are deluding themselves…

    Two questions:

    1 – Do you believe Westminster will agree to a biding, *constitutionally-sanctioned* referendum ever again?

    2 – Do you believe an unilateral declaration of independence to be a credible option?

  15. Terry Glancy

    Great Article. We need to learn how to address over 55’s who rely on old media more. We need to decimate Labour. Above all we just need to keep this going at local levels , engage those 16/17 year olds along with everyone else.

  16. EdinburghEye

    None of this deals with the main reasons (in my opinion) that Yes failed to get the majority.

    One: Lack of interest by Yes enthusiasts in why people were voting No or were undecided. This one is key. You don’t appear to know or care even now why many people voted No: you want to believe people were tricked into/lied into voting against independence. You’ll never change anyone’s mind using that line of argument.

    Two: Lack of planning. This one is also key. The SNP plan for independence was muddled and vague. Key areas were completely wrong – currency union, aka “we’ll just use the pound” would have ensured iScotland was still tied to rUK. I came to the conclusion that I had to vote No – after months of being undecided – when I realised what currency union entailed.

    Three: Lack of respect. 55% of Scots voted No. Your belief that you are up against the British Establishment shows a distinct lack of respect for the 55%. You want to get a majority Yes vote in another referendum? You need to convince people who thought long and hard and decided against independence. You won’t do that by disrespect and abuse.

    1. Ian Brannan

      @Edinburgh eye “you want to believe people were tricked into/lied into voting against independence”

      There is now irrefutable proof that this was the case, one of the no campaign’s official leaflet https://www.facebook.com/bettertogetheruk/photos/a.321977804552534.75744.301783293238652/724489937634650/?type=1 states:

      Friday 19th September – The day after a NO vote the timetable for further powers will be published as a motion before the UK Parliament. All UK parties will support the motion”.

      This deadline has now passed and no motion was published, it was an outright lie designed to con the Scots electorate into voting no. According to Lord Ashcroft one quarter of Scots voted because of more powers, this numbers approx 500,000 enough to have swung the vote into a YES win.

      Quite simply these people voted no on a proposition of lies in addition to the leaflet above the party leaders are already disregarding “the vow” featured The Daily Record, 15 September 2014. which stated:

      ““David Cameron , Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg have signed up to a historic joint statement that was demanded by the Daily Record on behalf of the people of Scotland.

      The unprecedented agreement was signed after the Record demanded that the leaders clearly explain what they are offering so the Scottish people can decide if it is a better alternative to independence.

      The agreement was brokered by former prime minister Gordon Brown and Scottish Labour. This new pledge means that all the parties with a chance of forming the next UK government have guaranteed the ‘extensive’ new powers will be put on the statute book next year.

      Brown said: ‘We have agreed a timetable for that stronger Scottish Parliament – a timetable to bring in the new powers that will go ahead if there is a No vote. A White Paper by November, put into draft legislation by January.’”

      From Yesterday’s Guardian – http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/19/labour-ed-miliband-constitutional-convention

      “Ed Miliband will convene a constitutional convention to discuss the future of devolution and power at Westminster.

      The convention will be a form of semi-representative assembly going beyond elected MPs. It would begin before the next election with every nation and region in the country engaged in dialogue with the people about how power needs to be dispersed, not just in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but in England too.

      The Labour proposal is that these debates will bring together MPs and councillors with ordinary citizens. Each region will produce a report outlining a series of recommendations, covering for example: how sub-national devolution can be strengthened; how the regions can be given more of a voice in our political system; and how we can give further voice to regional and national culture and identity.

      This would be followed in autumn 2015 with a constitutional convention to determine the UK-wide implications of devolution and to bring these recommendations together.

      It will discuss the shape and extent of English devolution and what reforms are needed in Westminster, as well as the case for a regionally representative Senate or for codifying the constitution.

      Any recommendations would be debated by parliament.”

    2. KingRog

      Yes went from 25% two years ago to 45% despite a relentlessly negative campaign by all the Unionist parties, a written press that was 99% pro-Union and an establishment which included the BBC. That is a considerable achievement. I believe there is bound to be a proportion of No voters who will realise they have been conned. You say we dn’t know why people voted No. There are various reasons: 1, The haves who cared for purely selfish reasons; 2, Those who genuinely believe we are better in the Union; 3, Those who were simply scared; 4, Those who believed the incessant stream of lies. It was very difficult to solve the last problem when the media were hopelessly biased. To give you one example. On Europe the most knowledgeable man on EU membership was never interviewed by either the written press or the BBC. His name is Graham Avery, the Honorary Director General of the European Commission. He has overseen the last 14 countries to gain admission. He gave an eloquent address to a Parliamentary Committee at Holyrood and described as ‘absurd’ the constant lies from UK politicians, including Cameron, about Scotland having to ‘ join a queue’ and perhaps not even getting into the EU. He explained succinctly that there was only one essential for EU membership: does a country meet the criteria. He said Scotland clearly did and would be admitted quickly. I asked many friends if they had ever heard of Graham Avery. None had. I wrote to several newspapers and the BBC asking why they never interviewed him. I got no reply. That is what we were up against.

      1. EdinburghEye

        There are various reasons: 1, The haves who cared for purely selfish reasons; 2, Those who genuinely believe we are better in the Union; 3, Those who were simply scared; 4, Those who believed the incessant stream of lies.

        Like I said: Yes movement uninterested in reasons for voting No, having invented their own.

        Graham Avery explained succinctly that there was only one essential for EU membership: does a country meet the criteria. He said Scotland clearly did and would be admitted quickly

        With a central bank, iScotland would have met the criteria for EU membership. But the SNP planned for iScotland not to have a central bank – they outlined this in the White Paper and the specifics could be found in the FCWG report. So iScotland could never have joined the EU. This was currency union, and currency union was the reason I voted No.

    3. SC1

      1. Polls and debates shows clearly showed reasons for voting no. The reasons were well known. The vast majority were fears and concerns about currency, EU, economy, defense, plus accepting promises of more significant powers.

      Many questions were deliberately left unanswered by UK government in order to cause the uncertainty they could then play on.
      Voters had to use an element of common sense in separating politics, from the likely pragmatic reality after a YES vote. But mass media definitely pushed scenarios of doom and gloom.

      2. Continuing to use the pound was recommended as the best option in the short term.
      It would have ensured a seamless switch-over, and been easiest for business in both countries. A Scottish currency could perhaps come later, if economies ever diverged.

      I am curious as to why this led to a NO vote –

      because iScotland would still be tied to the UK ??

      Because even if we kept the pound, and accepted we wouldn’t control interest rates, like now, we would still have had FAR more powers over our economy.

      We handed political power back, and now the important decisions are out of our hands.

      Independence really came down to one basic question:
      Who holds the political power – Scotland or Westminster ?
      I feel pretty saddened and confused that voters here chose to hand it back..

      1. EdinburghEye

        I opted to vote No, because the SNP intended to hand economic power to Bank of England / Westminster, and there was no opposition to this in the Yes movement. Without a central bank iScotland could not have joined the EU: with control of iScotland’s economy handed to Bank of England and beyond it the City of London, the Scottish Goverment would have had far less power over spending than under devolution, and no Scottish voter would have had any power to amend that arrangement – it would all be legislated at Westminster, and iScotland would have no MPs any more.

        I found this out,by the way, from reading The White Paper and the Financial Commission Working Group report.

        1. Iridium Dawn

          Thank you EdinburghEye. Clearly this is an issue for many people. Looking at the exit poll, 57% of No voters cited the pound as a major issue, balanced pretty evenly between the sexes. Understanding this will make us stronger in future.
          I pegged the older generation’s issue with the MSM and social media pretty early but couldn’t get it published or distributed widely enough.
          Next time will be different.

        2. SC1

          Ok. If we had a currency union, as seemed inevitable, despite the big bluff, then the independent BofE would still be the central bank for the entire currency zone.

          EU is pragmatic and expansionist.
          Peaceful Scotland wouldn’t be a problem when they are lining up Serbia and Albania.

          But the point about less spending control than now doesn’t make any sense to me at all..

          We would still have had fiscal powers, if not monetary powers. That is still far more control over our economy than we do now.

          There might be budget limits imposed but that is sensible anyway.

          We would have gained all the other powers allowing us to compete in many areas. Taxes, Energy, Airports, etc

          Now we are back to having NO powers !

          Only limited spending decisions over a block grant determined by Westminster.
          Mainly juggling spending decisions between Health, Education, and Social Services.

          How can we compete with London now ?
          Power is out of our hands. We are now politically just a region.

          We still have 59 MP’s but that is only 9% influence.. less if you include the Lords.
          Pretty meaningless.

          1. EdinburghEye

            If we had a currency union, as seemed inevitable, despite the big bluff, then the independent BofE would still be the central bank for the entire currency zone.

            No. The Bank of England would still be the central bank for the UK. As iScotland wouldn’t be part of the UK, iScotland wouldn’t have had a central bank. iScotland would have had whatever access to BoE services that could have been negotiated between the Bank of England and the Tories at Westminster – Labour had made clear they wouldn’t be doing it, so if Yes had got the majority, currency union would have had to be set up by the Tories before May 2015.

            I’m glad in a way that you support my view that currency union “seemed inevitable” – I think so too: that was why I saw I had no alternative but to vote No to stop it.

            EU is pragmatic and expansionist.Peaceful Scotland wouldn’t be a problem when they are lining up Serbia and Albania.

            Oh sure: I’m sure the EU would have worked out some way to keep iScotland as an attached region of rUK, in much the same way as other attached regions of rUK that don’t qualify for EU membership are still more or less inside EU laws and trading rights. But iScotland wouldn’t have had MEPs or other representation because it couldn’t have qualified for membership without a central bank.

            But the point about less spending control than now doesn’t make any sense to me at all..

            All national governments fund their spending by borrowing. A government with its own currency can if necessary expand its spending by printing more money. A government in control of its own national economy gets to decide how much to borrow, and what to spend it on. iScotland would have had to borrow to be able to spend – but wouldn’t have had any control over currency, and would have had to put its borrowing power under the final control of the central bank of another country. Accepting a currency union would certainly have made Scottish independence more palatable to the City of London and the British establishment, as it would have ensured that the oil money could keep pouring in, while the Bank of England could have dictated where and who from and how much the Scottish Government was allowed to borrow.

            This is, in fact, less control over spending that the Scottish Government now has, with a block grant and control over spending in devolved areas. And obviously, it’s completely undemocratic: no Scottish voter would ever again have even the slightest say in any appointment that would have final control over what was spent and how in iScotland.

            Nor do I see any reason to believe that such an arrangement would be set up in a way that any Scottish government would be able to terminate it. Currency union would have to be legislated at Westminster, and you’d have to be very optimistic and naive to think it would be legislated on terms beneficial to Scotland. Yet we’d have been locked into it.

            Better to step back, rethink, and plan for something better.

          2. SC1

            Scotland would have continued in the EU in its own right after negotiations – not as a UK region, but as a normal nation state with MEP’s

            The Euro question was a red herring – Even if a currency zone somehow wasn’t agreed, and we kept the pound, Economists said you could set up a very basic central bank, and ‘outsource’ its responsibilities to the BofE.
            Some basic functions, would just have to be there ‘technically’, so that future governments had the option.
            Sweden has never switched over to the Euro despite signing up for it.
            On paper, there is a requirement to join at some point in the future, but in practice it can’t be enforced. Again, the EU is pragmatic, and makes the rules up as it goes. The EC Chief said Scotland’s application would be treated as a ‘special case’.

            Regarding the borrowing issue:

            No offense, but I think that is the strangest argument for voting NO I have heard.
            You are only looking at one side of the picture.
            We would still have more FISCAL powers, even if we voluntarily delegated monetary powers to an independent central bank of England, which would possibly have been renamed the Bank of Britain.

            We would still have FAR MORE powers than we do now !

            Spending through borrowing is only one half of the equation – and it is not the responsible thing to do anyway. We would have sensible borrowing limits that we could afford.

            But mainly, we needed the extra powers to grow the Scottish economy as a whole – to provide more jobs and receive more taxes to spend overall.

            All the extra powers of independence would have helped us.
            Saving money on defense, competing more effectively etc

            Just one example – the airlines bosses said tourism could DOUBLE in an independent Scotland, if we had the powers to reduce passenger tax, and encourage more direct international flights.
            We can’t do that anymore, so Heathrow will remain the main hub.

            Limited devolution and a block grant never lets us realize our true potential, within a pooling and sharing model – that mostly results in Scotland ‘sharing’ all its revenues from its large natural resources.

            We just have to accept what we are given back.

            I just can’t see the argument that this somehow gives us more powers than independence!
            It really doesn’t.

            And we may never have the chance again, if barriers are now enacted to prevent future referendums.

            We had our chance, and we blew it – partly out of misinformation and lies.

          3. EdinburghEye

            Scotland would have continued in the EU in its own right after negotiations – not as a UK region, but as a normal nation state with MEP’s.

            Only if the SNP ditched currency union and agreed iScotland had to have its own central bank. Otherwise, iScotland couldn’t have fulfilled half a dozen of the Articles of Enlargement and so couldn’t have joined. Do the background reading. I did.

            The
            Euro question was a red herring – Even if a currency zone somehow
            wasn’t agreed, and we kept the pound, Economists said you could set up a
            very basic central bank, and ‘outsource’ its responsibilities to the
            BofE.

            Sure, if you didn’t want Scotland to be a real independent country, but a dependent tributary of rUK. The fact that so many Yes campaigners told me this, and thus demonstrated that they had no confidence in Scotland as an independent country, confirmed my decision to vote No to stop currency union. Why vote for independence when a large proportion of those voting Yes are only doing so because the SNP have comforted them with promises that Scotland won’t really be independent?

          4. SC1

            Agreed, no point arguing, the result is in.

            But from your comments it looks like, unfortunately, you fell for some misinformation about the EU.
            Can you find any statement from anyone in the YES campaign about Scotland joining as as some sort of region?.
            I doubt it.

            We would have continued membership under the UK, while negotiating our new status as an independent state.
            The new EC president said that the result would be respected, and that Scotland would be treated as a ‘special case’ – not a completely new application. The EU makes up its own rules, and there are already all sorts of exceptions and opt-outs.

            Realistically, we weren’t going to be refused membership because of any technicality. The UK, as the current member state, had the ability to ask for an official statement to clear up the position, but refused to do so – partly because it knew what the answer would be, but also because it wanted to deliberately use uncertainty as a campaign tactic.
            At the end of the day, people just had to use common sense.

            We will see what happens now with more powers, but one thing is for sure.
            Scotland is no longer in any position of strength.

            We could have had many more powers, including fiscal powers, if not monetary. There are far more ways to grow the economy and improve the country, than just borrowing money and going into debt – which isn’t prudent anyway.

            Now we have no real powers. Back to regional status.

            We can only wait and see what scraps we receive from the table.
            And I expect many will be disappointed.

            All the best.

          5. EdinburghEye

            But from your comments it looks like, unfortunately, you fell for some misinformation about the EU.

            Quite possibly. I don’t pretend to be a legal expert. My sources of information were The White Paper, the Financial Commission Working Group Report, and the EU’s Articles of Enlargement. You’re probably familiar with the first two – I read The White Paper in March/April this year, and followed up my concerns by reading the Financial Commission Working Group Report. In the course of researching issues around iScotland not having its own central bank and Westminster/BoE controlling iScotland’s economy, I discovered that without a central bank, iScotland could not fulfil half a dozen of the Articles of Enlargement, which meant, quite simply, that if the SNP had followed through on their plans for currency union, iScotland could not have joined the EU as an independent nation as it would not have qualified.

            Ironically, before reading the White Paper/the FCWG report, I had regarded all concerns about EU membership as a red herring, as I had taken for granted that iScotland would have its own central bank, and therefore would more than qualified for membership.

            Can you find any statement from anyone in the YES campaign about Scotland joining as as some sort of region?.

            No. I looked extensively for one, after realising this crucial problem, and found that no: no one in the SNP was admitting the problem with their plans for currency union, no one in the Scottish Greens, no one in the Yes movement generally: either no one else had done the research, or no one who understood the problem wanted to bring it to the attention of Yes voters. That dishonesty, by the way, again confirmed my strong conviction that a No vote was the right thing to do.

          6. EdinburghEye

            Let me add, too, that for me “No” was an ethical/idealistic as well as a pragmatic vote. I saw no reason to vote “Yes” to get the currency union that the SNP had planned – less control over Scottish government spending, a strong undemocratic tie to Westminster/City of London that Scottish voters couldn’t amend or break, and no EU membership. That part was pragmatic.

            But also, it was clear to me that the SNP had been thoroughly dishonest: they had campaigned extensively both on “keeping the pound” and EU membership, and “keeping the pound” meant their no-central-bank currency union. I am quite certain that they did so to maximise the Yes vote, but in doing so, they had ensured either:

            -that Yes voters would get an “independent” country with no real powers, only technically inside the EU (much as other dependent microstates attached to the UK are inside the EU without full membership), but with the UK pound sterling as Scotland’s only legal currency. (That is called “dollarisation”, when one country accepts another country’s legal tender as their own: most countries strive to avoid it.)

            -or else that Yes voters would get an independent country in the EU, but without the currency union that the SNP had promised: iScotland would have had to use the euro or its own independent currency.

            Either way, many Yes voters would have been disappointed: they wouldn’t have got what they voted for.

            It was a bad campaign, a poor ethical choice. Something as important as independence should be won honestly, not on lies.

            [Quick note: Yes, Better Together *also* lied. But on currency union, they didn’t have to – the SNP’s dishonesty and the Yes movement’s failure to challenge that was a big, big open goal.]

  17. Joe Murray

    Still with you – I am proud to be one of the 45%. My flags still fly in my garden, my yes posters are still on my windows. I continue to say yes to an independent Scotland and I will not be cowed by selfish, fearful people. Let’s make social media mainstream media. Journals, magazines, podcast news bulletins. National Collective has some of the most intelligent and creative folk in Scotland within it.

  18. KingRog

    I feel ashamed of my generation. I am, thankfully, one of the 23% who voted yes. The rest of my age group let down the young people of our country who voted for a future, despite the weight of propaganda against them. Their time will come. Unfortunately a lot of the oil which could have been used as a platform for a transition period will have been squandered by Westminster. But it isn’t over yet. The 45 need to stay strong, keep voting SNP into power at Holyrood and keep demanding better for our country.

  19. Lin Ogilvie

    Hold on a sec with the “old people.” Our Nan is 72 years old and voted YES!! All her bairns and grandbairns voted YES. And we’ll all vote YES the next time too.

  20. Andy Robertson

    I’m very tired and not sure what my point is here but… how we’re using Ashcroft report. 1 in 4 voted No because of new powers being guaranteed. Yet, “No voters were much more likely than Yes supporters to say they decided more than a year ago or always knew how they would vote.” I don’t think the ‘Vow’ turned many heads if I’m honest.

  21. Michael Kennedy

    (Please SHARE to YES SUPPORTERS) !
    Now Brothers & Sisters of OUR Scotland, do we Lie down and accept this totally fixed/rigged Tory Vote or does a Scottish rebellion start like I have heard has already began from some sources ?

    Its is so obvious that the yes/no Vote was rigged/fixed as basically saying “no” on that ballot paper meant that you wanted to be lead by a London Tory Government.

    Now, …when was the last time Scotland voted for a Tory Government ? Please tell me, hurry up, tell me, let me just put it this way, SCOTLAND HATES THE TORIES AND EVERYTHING THEY HAVE EVER STOOD FOR !

    So, what now ? as I said, do we sit back and say “ok Tories” (lets face it, all the Parties in London are all Tory based at the Root, Labour, Lib-dem, UKIP etc, they are all Tories, no getting away form it).

    So why O why would Nearly the whole of Scotland Vote yesterday 18th Sep 2014 for the English Tory party ? Why ?

    The simple truthful answer is that they wouldn’t and that is why WE ALL KNOW THE VOTE WAS FIXED, NO DOUBTS ABOUT IT.

    I Personally sat all day and night and right through the early hours to watch the results coming in and I couldn’t believe my eyes to be honest !

    I am in Glasgow, at least Glasgow voted YES, but big deal because nearly the whole lot of the rest of Scotland Didn’t apart from a few places, not anywhere near enough (that’s if you believe that it was not fixed or rigged).

    Today in the houses of parliament in London the MP’s are already saying they “WILL FOR SURE “BLOCK” ANY MOVE TO GIVE SCOTLAND ANYMORE SERIOUS POWERS IN THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT” !

    Again, we knew this would happen about 1 year ago or more as they admitted they would give Scotland nothing or make things 100 times worse for us “guaranteed” even if we voted no, so thats more proof that you know the vote was rigged.

    Some other things are as follows :>>

    I got speaking to a guy in the early hours of this morning while the votes were coming in and he said that him and his friend tailed/followed a “Normal white Van” that was loaded with ballot/voting paper boxes, just a driver and passenger got in, apart from that the van was empty, no other people, no Voting security, no Police protection, nothing !

    That van then drove to the place where the votes were to be counted, now, what if, just what if, some of those boxes of votes were tampered with ? Who was there to say they were or weren’t ? no one !

    Also, another example of vote rigging/fixing that could be possible is that in Dundee, not once, but twice the building had to be evacuated because of what is being said was deliberate Fire Alarms from what I hear, so again, all those thousands of votes were left unsecure and unguarded, what does that say to you even though Dundee did get a Yes, what does that tell you, I know what it tells me !

    Another example that was shown live on SKY TV is a Lady counting the Votes and she only just started to count a few, so it was a brand new pile of votes and she had a clear table infront of her, she put two voting papers in one pile and another in another pile, then the camera’s showed her switching the Voting papers around from each pile, what do you think was going on there ?, and that’s live on a SKY TV Camera too, I know what I think !

    Finally just for now, there was the famous Live Tv camera shot of thousands of YES votes sitting on a No Table, the voting counters or the Tv dept tried to say they were only put there because there was no room available elsewhere, now, what do you think about that ? I know what I think !

    Ohh and then Today the London Government “HAVE ALREADY” said that they will not allow a second Vote again that they just promised they would allow weeks ago, they came out today and Said “No Way” are Scotland getting another chance at the vote, what do you think about that ? I know what I think.

    I personally see a rigged/fixed Vote because of a lot of things, not just the things I mentioned, THERE IS TOTALLY NO WAY SCOTLAND VOTED FOR A TORY GOVERNMENT, NO WAY THEY DID, and that Is why I firmly believe that the vote was rigged or fixed !

    Its just my opinion plus a few things I have heard too that I mentioned !

    Please let me know if any of you agree or disagree as I believe there is ways and means to get our vote done again and this time “we, the public” get to watch over things and make sure there is no fixing or rigging going on, even if we have to take this to the European Court of Human Rights !

    I mentioned at the start that I have heard already through various sources that there could be plans for a Rebellion, we might not need to even go that far, but we all need to speak NOW and let US WORK OUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO ABOUT “OUR” SCOTLAND being handed back again for another lifetime of total misery under the Dictatorship of London Rule !

    Please let me know what you all think, thank you, YES SCOTLAND.

    p.s
    remember, loads of other countries all over the world fight for things when they know they have been unfairly treated, and we have been unfairly treated all these years letalone just at this Vote, we need to do something, we cant let the London Government walk all over us again forever, and I mean do it the correct legal way, but as I say, I did hear through various sources that a rebellion has either already started or is being planned, its best that doesn’t need to happen though, we can get this to work for us if we all stick together and work something out and keep talking, NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER, Alba gu bràth Brothers and Sisters of Scotland, Alba gu bràth !

  22. Kevin Waddington

    So…..Alex Salmond own constituency failed to back him…..the oil industry in Aberdeen failed to back him…….Faslane region failed to back him….Rosyth failed to back him……RAF Lossiemouth and Kinloss failed to back him….City of Edinburgh failed to back him…..All of the above vital to Scottish independence and all you guys can do is scream scaremongering, media bias and vote rigging. Look at the facts……the independence proposal wasnt worth the risk and people voted accordingly. Accept the result and move forward.

    1. Dave Soulsby

      HAHAHAHA you hope You still trying to gloat mate give it a rest you are so boring now off you go and play now. leave the real debate to the grownups

  23. Philip Crabtree

    The “No” campaign obviously was NOT an incompetent campaign. It worked. You may not have liked it, but it still worked. While I wont dispute the merits or not if a free Scotland (it’s not my place as an American) the only way to prove your arguments are stronger is to control the message. You have to have a better PR campaign.

  24. Val

    Alternative media is a MUST. I’d be willing to pay for one. I’d cancel my BBC subscription if i was living in the UK and i’m inceasingly disillusioned with the Guardian.

    1. Dave Soulsby

      Val, I know! all of the institutions that I have grown up with and seen as guardians of truth and democracy have be proved to be only instruments of an oppressive establishment.
      HOW SAD!

  25. Jerry Weaver

    We the undersigned demand a revote of the Scottish Referendum, counted by impartial international parties.
    http://www.change.org/p/alex-salmond-we-the-undersigned-demand-a-revote-of-the-scottish-referendum-counted-by-impartial-international-parties?recruiter=154926875&utm_campaign=twitter_link_action_box&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=share_petition
    Petition by Kirstie Keatings – Rosyth, United Kingdom

    Countless evidences of fraud during the recent Scottish Referendum have come to light, including two counts of votes being moved in bulk into a No pile, Yes votes clearly being seen in no piles and strange occurences with dual fire alarms and clear cut fraud in Glasgow. We demand a revote be taken of said referendum, where each vote shall be counted by two individuals, one of whom should be an international impartial party without a stake in the vote.

  26. Naomi-Louise Benton-Shaw

    Whilst it’s natural for us to have varied opinions please remember there will be avid no supporters trawling the web to continue to knock the stuffing out of the yes support. They want us demoralised and divided…we need to be steadfast and united. I remember only to well the addage ‘if at first you don’t succeed use the boot and then the heid’.(meaning try brute force and when that doesn’t work use your brain) my grandfather…one of those pesky no voting pensioners said it many times. Whilst politically we are poles apart the logic is sound and we need to use our brains on this matter to sway the vote. There have been many vague promises from Westminster…none of which have as much substance as the harr over the forth or clyde…but we need to do more than call them liars. We need to show the people of Scotland how strong a nation we can be. We have track record of facing bullies and overcoming obstacles and most of the people who were really unsure voted no due to feeling overwhelmed and underprepared…the media helped in that by repeating over and over that the yes campaign had no plans on how to lead the country from 19 September. Mudslinging and name calling is playground fighting and the older generation have seen those tactics before…they remember Thatcher and Kinnock playing tit for tat before we had 5 tv channels. We need to play on a different level…on the ‘ask not what you can do for your country but what your country can do for you’ tack. The line which lists the good things and how that impacts Jock Bloggs and the generations to follow. The line which shows Scotland is not a new born baby but an educated school leaver with enough qualifications to go it alone and bring home enough bacon to feed every mouth. We need evidence and surity that wishy washy ideas are not pie in the sky but WILL become IMMEDIATE policy. Locating answers needs to be a simple process…NOONE should have unanswered questions. The issues of currency and privatisation of the nhs need solid policy, along with others. The funding of benefits and the care of the elderly, schools, defense and EU spring to mind too. I personally am hugelyeffected by this result as for 10 plus years i’ve been waiting for surgery following a huge misdiagnosis and eventually having a tumor removed. Sitting here as the vote came in I watched my promises by heads of departments and Nicola Sturgeon (as minister for health) vanish within hours. I’m left wondering what I’ve fought so hard for the last 10 years for. Why i didn’t give up at age 28 and go quietly to the nursing home chosen for me….why i self discharged unable to walk and drew a huge black line under memory loss, pinned legs and a wheelchair and my kids living with their dad. I’ve been fighting my own battles a long time and I’ll continue to fight…for me, my family and for scotland. We are seen to be the underdog…we now need to find tenacity and keep going. I’m off to tribunal at end of october as ive been promised 6 rounds of surgery and have had 1…in 2012 then met barriers budget cuts and lack of communication. So…let’s do some planning and set up smaller groups locally who can address the questions informally….let’s have a cheery face and a smile for those who need it….aggression and intimidation is not the answer. That will lead to many more problems than it will address. Lets remember our children are watching to see what we do and learning from our behaviour…both good and bad. Lets be a credit…not only to those children but also to our ancestors who lived breathed and died scotland even though tartan and bagpipes were forbidden…they knew how important it was to be Scottish…don’t let us forget!!

    1. Dave Soulsby

      Thanks for some really good comments, I feel for you! My wife is also disabled and has been left in extreme pain after a botched operation for cancer.
      Good luck for the future

  27. Martyn Whit

    Sadly, I don’t live in Scotland any more as there’s not much call for my profession. However, after the no vote I was and am devastated. Currently looking into ways that I can get involved, whether I can get back or not. This must not be allowed to end here, we need to radically reduce the mainstream parties’ Scottish returns to Westminster. Despite what that swine Cameron says, the issue is not settled

  28. Pjam28

    You should be proud to live in a democracy and respect the outcome. If anything it is this borderline paranoia of the media, politicians and basically anyone who may have raised the smallest question about if an independent Scotland would actually work in practice rather than in theory that now has the potential to damage this country which you claim to be so passionate about. Talk about hope over fear, it is these types of conspiracy theories that are now generating the fear.
    It is also so confusing that amidst the apparent disdain for Westminster both in the lead up and aftermath of the referendum, people have failed to grasp that under Salmond’s version of “independence”, the currency union would mean that Westminster still had control
    over some of our biggest economic levers and areas of tax. How is that independence?

  29. Kevin Waddington

    Look at the demographics of the results of the vote and you can see why the vote went the way it did and its nothing to do with scaremongering.

    The 4 areas that voted yes are areas with high unemployment and lower incomes. You may say I am way off the mark but look at the Ares with higher % of margin of victory and you will find more affluence and obviously more likely to want to stay as part of the Union rather than risk their savings.

    With regards to the +65 being scared into voting yes……if that age group has that much of an influence on the final outcome it busts proves the case that Scotland has an aging population and combine that with unemployment you would have less money being put into the pot generating income thus needing increased taxes etc after independence.

  30. DavidGBK

    Where do you get the 1 in 4 No voters cast their vote on the basis of further devolution? No in the polls has consistently been ahead of Yes and the “Vow/Pledge” did not lead to any great upsurge in NO voters. No won because the SNP had no plan just a white paper wish list.

  31. Dave Soulsby

    This is not the first political kicking I have had, It’s hard to take I know. I am a Geordie ” englishman” 3rd generation Labour member and voter, Trade unionist Ex Boilermaker Time served in the shipyards of the Tyne and Blyth. My grandparents were academics on one side and business owners on the other, They all worked for and supported the formation of the labour party as the political wing of the trade union movement,.
    I now pledge to continue their work for justice and equality for all.
    I want to work with all of the truly democratic liberal left wing groups to DESTROY the treacherous undemocratic Tory lite SCOTTISH LABOUR PARTY who have betrayed the working class and only represent BIG BUSINESS and their own pockets. Ed Miliband thinks we all are worth a whole £1.00 an hour pay rise to be brought in by the end of the next parliament. Thats 2020 by the way.
    WELL Aren’t we all better together.
    Lets be proud we achieved a great thing here. We are warriers who know we lost a battle its not the end of the world or the war!
    Be positive get up regroup and fight on!
    I feel the most important step we need to take is to form a SCOTTISH INDEPENDENT BANK with a mandate to lend to local business and give its savers and depositors a risk free return on their investment.
    We get 1,600,000 people to take their money out of RBS. HBos. Clydesdale and deposit it with us.
    That will stop the Banks ability to rob and blackmail us.
    We need to mobilise a full boycott of establishment news papers.
    1,600,000 drop in sales will punish them. we need to develop our own news papers and media outlets, A true free Scottish press.
    This will take time but in the mean time we have social networks to get our message out.
    Get together in your communities hold your heads high let everyone know I VOTED YES I am the 45%
    We will not be silenced or beaten by the lies and intimidation of the 1%
    Lets not forget all of the support we received from around the world we also need to support and help them in their fight 2,000,000 Catalans prayed for and chanted their support for Scotland Let us never forget or abandon them they have their own referendum coming soon VIVA Catalonia and Muchas Gracias

  32. Ewen Cameron

    We lost the vote but we aren’t beaten.
    We still have the organisation and we have the resolve. I think of the wee lassie in George square, frightened and surrounded by unionist thugs but she still held on to that saltire.
    That is what we have. We have won. We have the young.

  33. Brian McMullen

    Please keep National Collective going. Your creative contribution to the campaign was powerful and fun. Artists were the first to declare for YES and I now understand the power of imagination and art.

  34. Max Bennie

    *Sigh* Please grow up, people. It’s over. Stop blaming everyone else for the Yes campaign’s failure to convince voters. They lost because they ran an insultingly emotive campaign that peddled lies, fallacies and half-truths. The Scottish people have spoken, why can’t you respect them and their choice? Deal with it like grown-ups and move on.

  35. Jim Monaghan

    can I please be removed from all connections to national collective, we were a group of ‘creatives’ who suported independence. I had no say in this statement which places NC in the party political theatre, attacking some parties and advocating support for others. I had no idea that this was a fundamentalist campaign. As there is democracy within NC how can you issue a statement on behalf of the group without an agreed position? I can no longer be a member of NC. If you ever return to being a group that advocates a vote for independence in a referendum, send me an email, I’d sign up to that!

  36. Sydney Bangham

    I have to admit to having been completely deflated. I couldn’t even be bothered eating. Then slowly, voices began to be raised again over the social media and I suddenly thought, “This isn’t finished yet.”
    Now I’m ready to carry on and to hope that we might be able to target those groups where we fell behind. Things like a copy of the DWP letter to the Scottish Government to be sent to every pensioner. Maybe even a telephone survey to find out if there are any waverers amongst those elderly people who did vote “No” and perhaps even to test the waters amongst those who voted “Yes”.
    There certainly seems to be a rising tide again but to be effective we really need to keep all 1.6 million aware that the “Yes” movement isn’t dead. Not everyone has or even follows social media. How do we find and encourage the others?
    The jump in membership of SNP, SSP, and The Greens shows that people are still interested in keeping this going. I hope that you will continue to encourage and inform as you have already done.

  37. Suriani

    45% are already existentially independent. creating alternative structures where that independence can flourish is the task. we are become a counterculture in the true sense.

  38. Graham Noble

    Great words…..Can I suggest ..when we get going…New badges /stickers saying ” I voted Yes/and or 45%..best Graham Noble Elgin ..

  39. Pembroke

    Scots have held the highest positions of State within the UK in politics and the Civil Service. To a degree, the UK is like a ‘Greater Scotland’, such is the influence Scots have had. Thousands of Scots live quite happily all throughout the UK and cast their ‘Scottish votes’ on local MPs and councillors etc. Those decrying Westminster are in the same boat as those outside Scotland decrying the influence of Scottish MPs on matters outside Scottish constituencies. Well, a constituency is a line arbitrarily drawn – including the lines that demarcate countries. Who can claim the right that an opinion, a comment about a matter, is irrelevant and unworthy simply because it comes from someone not resident in a particular place? To think so is to look at the world through a rather narrow tunnel.

  40. Blitzen Maniax

    I am 52 years old. I am moving my business offshore and paying in bitcoins where necessary in this country. I am going to use the Tory rules to not pay another cent to the UK exchequer for the next 15 years. Its relatively easy to do and 100% legal at time of writing. My move will cost the exchequer the best part of 750k over the next decade and a half along with any spin offs that would have automatically occurred for UK banks etc. You can stick your Westminster pension up your arse. I could live better on the interest of my 750k and if another 100 join in then see how they survive without business tax. NI payments PAYE. From now on minimum wages, part time contracts and overtime paid offshore.I will be happy to make up an information pack for anyone looking for information on how to do the same unless of course they are from any media outlets not called the Sunday Herald. The fight continues.

  41. apolitical

    A lot of the debate prior to the indy vote has been around nhs Scotland .However this has been devolved to the Scottish government since 1998 with complete control of resources and funding within the block grant available from Westminster , If there are shortcomings the sgov has the right to divert funding from other sources or raise income tax by 3% .and spend it accordingly as well but they chose not to increase taxation why? I would willingly pay was it because the gov feared they may lose votes had they raised tax.I have a regular prescription but its free to me why? I can afford to pay for it . surely that money would be better spent on nhs funding it was free to those that were over 65 and on benefits anyhow previously.No sane person can argue that case surely.
    The money involved in funding the nhs is massive even in some countries like Norway you actually have to pay the g.p when you see him each time a small amount by their terms but you pay something or you did when I was there So the money has to come from somewhere it doesn’t go on trees There was the instance of a doctor being flown from india to work the weekend in ARI where I live at vast cost again this is the sgov responsibility there is no ducking out from that The sgov could have chosen to reduce funding for university tutition but didn’t and divert to nhs why don’t they go back to applying for a bursary for those that need it , As was the situation years ago again, its because its a vote winner to give something for nothing and is a great soundbite , No if you want better services you have to pay for them with taxes but the sgov choses not to do because they only have one policy and that is separation not real governance well guess what,
    they may soon have to step into the real world and produce money other than from the fabled money tree .
    If the feeling is so strong as we are led to believe in regard to separation why do the yes voters want to take us with them why not go for partition of scotland then both sides could be happy sure something could be worked out after all what,s the difference between separating Scotland and England and Scotland itself because that is what the sgov and snp are doing anyway with their policies .

Post Your Thoughts