Autonomy campaign criticised for ‘lack of ambition’

3 comments, , by , in Headlines, News

Criticism has been levelled against council leaders for failing to aim high in their negotiations with Scottish and Westminster governments for greater island autonomy.

A panel of mainly SIC members – along with Western Isles leader Angus Campbell – were told the Our Islands Our Future campaign “lacked ambition” at an open meeting attended by about 30 people in Mareel last night. Another 80 people followed the discussions on-line.

Gary Robinson

Gary Robinson

Political leader Gary Robinson was keen to highlight the benefits, he saw, that the campaign had already brought.

The efforts made by leaders from Shetland, Orkney and the Western Isles a year since an initial meeting in Inverness had already proved positive.

He insisted the launch last June had enjoyed “the best possible start” for the collective 70,000-strong islands population. Mr Robinson highlighted last year’s announcement surrounding the so-called Lerwick declaration during the Scottish cabinet’s visit to the isles. Other possibilities which could help island communities lay in relaxing state aid rules, as well as oil and gas community benefits and a transfer of powers from the Crown Estate.

Getting an audience with ministers and government officials, he said, came as a marked difference from 30 years ago when a report into island groups was published by the Montgomery committee in April 1984. He added it took two years for the findings to be debated in parliament, and that was in the early hours of the morning.

But not everyone was convinced enough had been done. Ali Inkster, from Burra, demanded to know why council leaders were not going further in their attempts to have greater powers.

He referred to a recent online article by the BBC, in which Mr Robinson was reported as having “no intention of playing its oil card and pushing for its own independence”.

He berated council leaders, insisting they were “not really asking for much” in their government negotiations.

He slammed the council for failing to keep schools open and cut waste.

“You turn around and say you’re not going to use the ‘oil card’. It’s the only card we’ve got outside of fishing. What exactly are you going to do to make sure they [the governments] keep their word, and why are you not going further?”

SIC Convener Malcolm Bell pic 4SIC convener Malcolm Bell said compromises had to be reached in search of a “broad agreement” between each of the three island areas. But he insisted more could be delivered, and pointed to examples set by Åland and Faroe where very different approaches had been adopted.

Faroe, he said, did it in “one fell swoop” whereas Åland’s autonomy came very differently.

“There are different ways to skin a cat,” he said.

The convener was supported by Mr Robinson, who said Åland was now “in its fourth act of autonomy”.

“We possibly stand more chance of success by going down that route,” the political leader said.

Fellow councillor Peter Campbell, also on the panel, said the council – established by an act of parliament – had taken practical measures in the search for greater autonomy which would achieve more than a “crash, bang, wallop” approach.

Former Shetland autonomy activist John Goodlad welcomed the campaign – but he wanted to be “a peerie bit critical” at the same time.

He said Our Islands Our Future lacked ambition, and criticised the campaign for not seeking legislative powers.

“There’s nothing in here about legislative autonomy. Don’t be unambitious,” he said.

Mr Goodlad also highlighted the strained efforts the Northern Isles had to go through to ensure they were given separate MSPs when the Scottish Parliament was established.

“Never, ever under-estimate how folk in the UK and Scotland just don’t get it.”

Audience member Danus Skene said he was supportive of the Our Islands movement. But he wondered if the islands could not raise more of their own income. Levies on oil throughput – which once helped create Shetland Charitable Trust – or renewables, he said, could be the way forward.

That raised observations from Mr Bell about the SNP government’s drive to draw services under Edinburgh control. Experiences with emergency services had shown the Scottish government, he said, had “centralised like no other”.

Burra man Geordie Pottinger sought assurances the campaign’s achievements would not be discarded by any future governments.

Mr Bell said the electorate was being “bribed with jam tomorrow to vote one side or another” in the independence debate.

But he insisted the referendum result was immaterial in terms of the Our Islands campaign. He said it was important to ensure everything the island groups had achieved was “tied down and protected” in the future.

George Smith: "Unless we take some swift action we might not have a Shetland College or and NAFC either."

George Smith: “Cross party support”.

Panelist George Smith pointed to cross-party support offered to the campaign, insisting it had enjoyed the backing of the Scottish Labour Party.

One question which filtered through the Twitter feed asked how young people were being involved in the campaign, which almost led to an embarrassing silence as the hitherto unspoken truth – that the meeting was dominated by men over a certain age – was laid bare.

Mr Robinson said the campaign was trying to “engage” with the younger generation. He wondered if its leaders needed to be going to other venues.

Mr Bell said he had been to the inaugural meeting of the Shetland Youth Voice, where a lot of “pertinent” points had been raised. He had also been going round schools with MSP Tavish Scott and MSYPs where “really hot topics” had come under discussion.

Michael Stout, also on the panel, said he was “not even going to go near the gender issue”.

About Ryan Taylor

Ryan Taylor is a reporter at The Shetland Times

View other stories by »

3 comments

  1. John Tulloch

    Well said, Ali Inkster and John Goodlad, the ‘Our Islands, Our Future’ (OIOF) campaign has been even more insipid than I feared.

    Mr Robinson is quoted above as wanting to stress the positives that have already been achieved.

    OK, so “Politicians of the Year” and Scottish Provost Association vice-chairmanship aside, what are they then?

    Didn’t he mention the wonderful achievement of winning government support for mainland grid connections hailed yesterday by Viking Energy? Wasn’t that one of the ‘Our Islands, Our Futures’ (OIOF) strategic objectives and weren’t there discussions with Ed Davey et al about that very topic during the recent Westminster meetings?

    There was an elephant in the room and nobody acknowledged or, even, noticed its presence, how very odd?

    Is that OIOF’s reward for not “playing the oil card”? And for not gaining ANY increased autonomy at all?

    Talk about damp squibs!

    Reply
  2. John Tulloch

    There’s a story going around that Stuart Hill will appear in an interview on Channel 4 News tonight, anyone else heard that?

    Reply
  3. Stuart Stenhouse

    Our Islands, Our Future….

    Who asked me on the last ballot paper if I wanted to vote for a candidate who exclusively wanted Shetland autonomy?

    Gary Robinson, please listen and do not make a total embarrassment of yourself; and Shetland.

    The only political parties (the chamber apparently do not support parties, being ‘neutral’), who promise Shetland powers include:

    LibDems – Jumped into bed with the Tories, and will never see a sniff of government for a generation.

    Labour – They will promise you, me and the rest of Shetland the moon; JUST GIVE US YOUR VOTE

    Tories – The defender of the United Kingdom. A happy family, better together, fantastic future together.

    Now, the self-same three parties are grouped together in opposing a YES vote come September.

    So why would they oppose Scotland voting for independence, and then applaud ‘oil rich Shetland’ declaring independence? Why?

    Gary Robinson attracted an audience of 35 at Mareel. 35, because ‘we were all out lambing and cutting grass’. Aye, likely story.

    Robinson, you and the chamber could not organise a raffle table at the Bigton Hall; and yet we are expected to be enthused by your future plans? And your future vision for Shetland is………..please tell me, the rest of the Shetland population.

    Balance the books, deliver services your constituents expect and stop closing services; and stop paying £100,000 one day at work for Council Staff.

    Then and only then, can we take you, and your fantastical proposal moderately seriously.

    Don’t engage yourself in the Scottish independence debate, when you cannot provide a black bin bag to your taxpayers.

    Reply

Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others. Comments are moderated. Moderators have been instructed to approve or reject comments but not to edit them. Comments may therefore be withheld due to one incautious phrase in an otherwise acceptable contribution.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>