21st May 2018
Established 1872. Online since 1996.

Done up like a kipper (Henry Condy)

Now that it’s over and the result was close, I wonder how all the vocal ones, who slapped down the yes vote feel, when David Cameron broke his promise on 19th September, less than 12 hours after the result was in.

Not only did he betray the yes vote, but worse still he betrayed the no vote. They voted no, on the strength of his promises, which not one of the three leaders could tell us about.

Then he betrayed one of the unionist pact – he gave an interview saying England would have powers in tandem with Scotland. This without consultation with Labour  (stabbing Labour in the back as you like) or Lib Dem leaders, but worse without even consulting his own party.

Gents, you were done up like a kipper. Labour, Lib Dem and Tory will be wiped out in Scotland. Labour will be minus 40 MPs in Westminster, so they are neutered. But he can’t promise powers to England so Ukip rises and forms a coalition with Cameron.

The SNP will have a flood of MPs, who having never ever voted on English matters in parliament, will from now on deal with English issues. That will really put the cat in amongst the pigeons.

On the famous “West Lothian question” Cameron thought he was smart. He will offer the Scots a pittance, give with one hand, take away with the other, and the SNP can’t refuse these crumbs or Cameron will say the SNP are breaking the deal.

But he will feel the anger of the Scot in the next election. He still might very well be the man in history who broke up the union. And all the Scots (not the SNP or Alex Salmond) wanted was to rule their own country in a fair democratic way, look after those less well off (that’s the Scottish way) and get the party who got the most votes in an Scottish election to rule.

One last thought: Cameron wants this question of future referenda buried for ever, but why do we have to go begging to an English parliament for this?

Henry Condy
Leog,
Lerwick.

35 comments

  1. Andy Holt

    All approximately one third of Scots wanted, Henry. And I for one did not vote no on the strength of any politicians’ promises and I’ll wager that goes for many another who voted “Yes” for the continuation of a strong and successful union.

    Reply
    • Henry Condy

      Gentlemen, your views on Osbourne selling Eurostar for £300,000,000 to offset the national debt. Not the tunnel just Eurostar, I didn’t think we had anything left to sell, in the thatcher era , Sattchi &Sattchi her advertising agents and Rupert Murdoch of the Sun ran a headline , on the eve of the election ” Would the last one out of Britain switch the light off ” she won the election on the strength of that headline. Advance to the present day and it is like a scary premonition

      Reply
  2. Andy Holt

    All approximately one third of Scots wanted, Henry. If the “can’t be bothered” brigade are counted as no’s. And I for one did not vote no on the strength of any politicians’ promises and I’ll wager that goes for many another who voted “Yes” for the continuation of a strong and successful union.

    Reply
  3. Trevor Berry

    Master Stroke!

    Reply
  4. Stewart Reed

    Seems like the fight has moved to a new dimension now. Round one was independence or dependence. Round two will be fought on the ticket of did or do you believe what that the english dominated westminster parliament will or will not offer is what was or was not what was offered.
    Already a plethora of promises have been broken, the main line Scottish parties loyal to westminster are already stabbing each other in order to wash their hands of their evil deeds during indyref. The SNP are now in a quandary as to call for another indyref, which the Scots might not like or do they wait until they are sure the promises are well and truly broken before they go on the attack. They might just leave it to the english to break up the union, but then again I have seen filleted fish with more back bone and guts than a fully fledged parliamentarian.

    Reply
    • Henry Condy

      This issue has nothing , causes no quandary to the SNP, it was a Yes / No vote, the people of Scotland who believed ,trusted, MPs, WHO, are all strangers ,and economical with the truth, stabbed the Scots in the back, dress it up any way you like,anything for a no vote. How these people who say get over it ,or you lost, stop whinging can honestly look in the mirror with a clear conscience, NO way , I know I couldn’t, and just because there are food banks all over the world does not make them right, especially where children are concerned. mark my words its the Scottish electorate who shall show where the strength lies next May the Issue is Scotland as a nation nothing more nothing less.

      Reply
  5. Steven Jarmson

    I don’t get all these English references from the failed yip brigade?? It sounds like racism to me. Of course England has more sway in the UK Parliament, its down to numbers, there’s more people in England than Scotland. But, quite often its the guys who aren’t affected by decisions who get legislation through Parliament, the Scottish MPs. David Cameron is right to give powers to England whilst giving more to Scotland. All this talk of broken promises sounds like Alex Salmonds favorite word, Scaremmongering.
    I voted NO, not because of the promises made by the three main parties, but because to vote yip would have been idiosy. Who wants independence light. If Scotland goes it alone we should be all out independent, I would vote yes if the nationalists gave me something proper to vote for.
    All you moaning yip voters are happy to “trust the will of the people” while you think you’re getting what you want. So why not accept you lost, stop scare mongering and lets get back to the real world of critisising the council for being inept, or arguing over the coming wind farm.

    Reply
    • joe johnson

      Thank you Steven Jarmson, totally agree with you. I really wish the yes voters and the SNP would just stop moaning and accept it, the majority in Scotland voted no. Alex Salmond ( good riddance , can’t stand him) should honor his pledge in the Edinburgh Agreement to respect the outcome of the referendum instead of throwing a paddy and making accusations that westminister tricked the voters. No promises have been broken. There will be more devolution for Scotland. Come on fellow scots. Lets move on.

      Reply
  6. David Spence

    Well Steven, I suspect that you would have been against all the satellite countries of the former U.S.S.R. wanting and gaining independence just after perestroika?

    Since being independent is an idiotic thing to do, despite many British, European and international companies benefiting immensely as a result of the reforms Russia did in the mid 1980’s, and there are no economic advantage or providing greater autonomy to the people of the country who are seeking independence, as well as many of those countries being part of the EU, standing up for the rights of a nation to have its own control and for the people of that country to have a greater say in that countries future is nothing whatsoever to do with independence I guess?

    If you supported the breakdown of the cold war, the right for countries to determine their own future rather than being controlled by Russia, then there is an element of hypocrisy in your views and opinions regarding Scotland seeking the same rights, justice and freedom.

    A system which economically undermines the country, forces its own laws upon a whole nation (bedroom tax for example) controls this country not for the benefit of the people of that country but purely for its own economic benefit.

    The United Kingdom is only united for the reasons that one country can use, exploit and suppress three other countries which equally have a right to determine their own future………….but I guess some people are of the unjust mentality ‘ If it isn’t broke, why fix it ‘………if only their vision was a little clearer, and their horizon wider, instead of having just tunnel vision.

    Reply
    • Iain Condy

      The indyref was a long time coming and as such it will not go away very quickly. Many a man’s hopes and aspirations for having his voice in his parliament heard (as opposed to the current system), were shattered. But not dashed there are further options. As for the anti English comments, nobody has ever said they are anti English in reference to indyref. I have seen and been the bictim of anti Scots from English collonialist types. The debate continues….

      Reply
    • Steven Jarmson

      Try comparing sugar with honey rather than vinegar David.
      You gnats really are desperate to muddy the water.
      What a ridiculous comparison. The USSR was a totalitarian regime that murdered its critics. Of course the nations rose upon the collapse of the government and declared their independence.
      The UK is nothing like that.
      If it was, I doubt any referendum would have been possible. (roll on some idiotic comment about something that happened 200 years ago that’s totally irrelevant to the modern UK)
      The UK isn’t perfect. No one thinks it is.
      But Id rather live in the real world of the UK than in some kind of botched independent Scotland. At least the UK can stand up to Europe, I don’t see the countries of the level of Scotland standing up to Europe, they tag along with one of the big boys. So would Utopian Scotland have tagged along with the UK as we would have had similar international interests or would it have tagged into another country just to look like things have changed. Either way, an independent Scotland would have been allowed to sit at the same table as the grown ups but it would have treated no better than a three year at a wedding, told to be quiet and eat you meal.

      Reply
      • Henry Condy

        Steve, in 1707, Scotland had an historic alliance with the French, called unsurprisingly ” The Auld Alliance ” now England , as usual warring with everyone , but more to the point , at that time France.now in 1603 James V1 / 1 of Britain, ruled England but the English were afraid the French, would side with the Scots,sail up the West coast, and attack England from the north, so they formed the Union of the Crowns, bought of the Scottish nobles , and we have suffered ever since,in modern day terms, MPs being bought with English gold, business men also, so. 321 years may have passed , but English gold still has power, or should I say men’s greed

  7. David McDowall

    David Spence you do realise that here is no hypocrisy here other than in the Yes camp. Scotland had a chance to choose democratically and it chose to stay a part of the UK. Just because you do not like the result does not mean it was not democratic and we certainly cannot claim to be being forced against our will into a union we do not want.
    You are just out of touch with what the majority of Scotland clearly wants.

    Reply
  8. John Tulloch

    The Argyll-based online newsblog “For Argyll” has an interesting snippet plus comment on devolution of new powers from Westminster to Holyrood – oil revenues!

    “Heavyweight senior journalist and media figure, Andrew Neil has tweeted: ‘North Sea oil revenues so de minimis for Treasury I understand it’s considering devolving them to Scot Parl. as part of tax power transfer’.

    If this is correct, it confirms the expert view of the relatively weak and declining value of North Sea oil revenues which the SNP dismissed as scaremongering during the independence referendum campaign.

    However, if this specific devolution is under consideration, handing over these revenues to Scotland would give the country control over this source of revenue and would remove the tedious dog whistle political mantra of It’s Scotland’s oil’.”

    http://forargyll.com/2014/10/potential-game-changer-in-andrew-neils-information-on-potential-treasury-devolution-plan/

    The UK’s constitutional metal is clearly malleable, at present. In the event that anyone in Our Islands, Our Future or the SIC is interested in meaningful local autonomy for Shetland, up to and including Faroese or Crown Dependency status, now is the time to stake your claim.

    But you’d better get a move on because the opportunity won’t last.

    Reply
  9. David Spence

    eeehhhh excuse me Mr David McDowell, where have I said that the recent referendum was undemocratic ? The winning margin was very slim. 10% is not a resounding statement of the people of a country deciding whether to go independent or not. If anything, it says that a large proportion of the population were wanting separation from the gripping hand of another country that shows nothing but contempt, arrogance and selfishness for its own reward.

    As for not being forced into an union we do not want, why it is that recent legislation being drafted up just now is ‘ forcing Scotland ‘ to agree to an union agreement for an indefinite time with no possibility of ever being allowed to seek independence ever again, and will always, for an indefinite period, be under the none negotiable conditions of another country in terms of Government laws, regulations and overall autonomy.

    The ‘ No campaign ‘, as it is transpiring, has had the wool pulled over the eyes and the vile Tory Government (what would you expect) has basically lied to them in regards to giving greater powers to Scotland………….but then again, those people who would have preferred to stay in the union, would easily be bought over, conned, bribed (call it what you want) by a Government that puts itself first before the people of the country it is supposed to represent……..but what else would you expect from a Capitalist Government whose sole purpose is to better itself commercially (privatisation) no matter what the cost is to the people of the country as a whole, and to those people foolish enough to vote No on the basis of the lies peddled from Westminster to convince them Scotland would be better off as part of a union (for one country (England) to exploit it (Scotland as well as Wales and part of Ireland) use it for income, deny this country any say in legislation due to its small representation in Westminster (devolution is a joke as the control and strings will still be pulled by Westminster)………..but hey ho, I guess you could say that was a form of pseudo democracy lol

    Reply
  10. Ian tinkler

    ” As for the anti English comments, nobody has ever said they are anti English in reference to indyref” That Sir, is absolute rubbish. There are hundreds of cyberNAT comments which are anti English, Even more anti Westminster. I can not imagine where you have been for the last two years, Iain, and I would hate to guess where you keep your brain if you really believe such piffle. Incidentally before you point out the obvious the bile came from both sides, no doubt the utterly divisive and obnoxious comments fro Salmond, Sillers et al
    stocked up emotive and unpleasant debate.

    Reply
    • Brian Smith

      Ian Tinkler is foaming at the chops, as usual; Tom Morton has been weeping with gratitude that Shetlanders voted No (Shetland Life, October). But most people acknowledge that the debates of the past few months have been energising. For a good result of them see the TUC’s Just Scotland report at http://www.ajustscotland.org/ The status quo really is a non-starter from now on!

      Reply
  11. ian tinkler

    It is good to see Brian remarking on my foaming chops again. I would be worried for my sanity if he just for once dropped his insults and agreed to a rational argument.! I have just one small thought for him to ponder. Has not Cameron not, yet again, again cleverly out manoeuvred the NATs and socialists? Not only is there now a democratic mandate for unity, but also Scotland will soon have its own tax raising powers. Does that not mean that for the first time ever working Scots will actually have to pay for the NATs socialist agenda? Free prescription for all, free higher education, no revenue from bedroom tax more welfare for all, loads of give aways. The only problem being all will be paid for by Scots out of income tax and the like. The incentive for high earners to move south will just grown enormously and the Scottish worker will see the true cost of Socialism as income tax rockets. Thank goodness I will soon retire and live on my enhanced pension with all the welfare advantages of an Edinburgh based Socialist Utopia. Remember that Brian when your taxes go up. Done up like a kipper, yes Brian, so you have been!!!!

    Reply
  12. David Spence

    Ian, I am sure if you had the choice of either paying higher taxes or paying a private company extortionate fee’s for a service, more than likely, which will be done very much by the cheapest method possible, but you will be charged well over the odds for this new privatised service because you have been brainwashed into believing that the private sector puts its customers first and its shareholder, greed and massive profits last.

    As well as your cost of living going up immensely (although this may not be applicable to your good self) and your salary going down (afterall, what company wants to pay its empoyee’s a good wage when it bites into profits) and you are forced into a way of life where you are working every hour god gives you just to make ends meet on your meagre income. Put into a position where you have to purchase the cheapest products to fulfil your idealistic lifestyle (a consumer lifestyle) you persistently see on your television, but completely forget or are brainwashed into believing, you will have to work the rest of your life to achieve a lifestyle you will never get because those in power will always make sure you are working class and will always remain working class for their benefit and not yours.

    The idealistic capitalist utopia will always put the powerful, rich and well off on top of the pyramid, whilst everybody else will be forced to work, be controlled and totally subservient to those above them. This has been the way for centuries, and it will continue as long as money, greed, profits, war and conflict (money being the new modern god) dictates how society is structured.

    As said previously, money brings out the worst in human nature and behaviour, and as long as this is the case, progress will never be done for the better and the problems caused by such a system will only grow larger and larger (climate change, the gap between the rich and poor widening) which will end up in either conflict, war (capitalism encourages war and conflict because it is highly profitable for the banks) or by other means where our demise as a species will be guaranteed………….so, good times ahead.

    Reply
  13. alan watson

    I see the yes brigade are still slepsin on sour grape an wasp broth you can hardly go out side the door without getting hit in the back of the head with a low flying dummy. The no voters have been accused of being bought off or being anti Scottish I was a no voter soon as salmond said referendum I just don’t trust them. When earl Patrick and his minions ( the lairds / merchants and ministers)arrived they left the people in dire poverty and living in a state akin to slavery .In the not to distant future what will be left for the young people of Shetland when they have turned our beautiful islands into an industrial wind farm and the last drop of oil is gone. Will it be to mass emigration

    Reply
  14. John Tulloch

    There’s an excellent article in “For Argyll and the Islands” which considers in detail how Orkney and Shetland have the ball at their foot by virtue of their importance to the survival of the Union.

    http://forargyll.com/2014/10/uk-constitutional-reform-federalism-damage-limitation-and-contingency-planning/#comment-2841432

    Wake up, SIC, OIC, “Opportunity Knocks”!

    Reply
    • Brian Smith

      Dependency. It doesn’t sound attractive, somehow.

      Reply
      • John Tulloch

        What’s in a name, Brian, I’ll happily settle for “British Overseas Territory” or, even “Scottish Protectorate”, if that’s the best offer (I’d need some persuasion with the latter, though, after what we’ve seen in the last couple of years!).

        The point is, with such autonomy, Shetland would have control of its own resources and development and would be free from Holyrood raiders swiping Shetland’s housing support grant (£40 million, reduced to £30 million by the generosity of Westminster who are still paying the hsg to Holyrood!).

    • Bill Adams

      Once again, the Argyll – based internet blogger telling those of us who are actually living in Shetland what is good for us. Why don’t you just accept that Shetland is in fact a part of Scotland, albeit a very distinctive part
      thereof. Leave the British Overseas Territory description to tax-avoidance havens like Gibraltar and the Cayman Islands etc.
      I suggest that you either put your money where your mouth evidently is and return to Shetland to stand in the next round of Council elections or gie us all a break.

      Reply
      • John Tulloch

        Bill Adams,

        I was born and brought up in Shetland and my ancestry, on all sides, goes back hundreds of years. I lived in Shetland for more than forty years, including throughout the period of the oil industry “Disturbance Agreement” and my late father engineered and supervised the installation of the electricity connections on most of the the islands.

        Just because my work and family took me out of Shetland, doesn’t mean I have to lose interest in what is best for the place. As they say, “You can tak da boy oot o’ Shetlan’, bit you canna tak Shetlan’ oot o’ da boy!”

        You have lived in Shetland a long time now, so why don’t YOU stand in the next round of council elections and start fighting for Shetland, instead of fighting for Salmond, Sturgeon and Holyrood, against the interests, if I may say, of your chosen home, Shetland?

        Alternatively, Bill, “gie WIS a break”!

  15. Ali Inkster

    Your right Brian it sounds terrible, isn’t it about time that scotland and the UK stopped being dependent on Shetlands resources for their spending plans

    Reply
    • Brian Smith

      What are your bargaining chips in these negotiations, lads, apart from Stuart Hill’s treatise?

      Reply
      • Ali Inkster

        The right to self determination and international law. What else is needed?

      • John Tulloch

        See my letter in tomorrow’s Shetland Times, Brian.

        It’s too long for a comment.

        Essentially, both governments need Shetland (and Orkney) and will move to keep what they can.

        Think votes, strategic sea ways, fishing and mineral resources.

        If Scotland votes Yes and Shetland No, Shetland can decide who, if anyone, to join, so Holyrood have to open up.

        But Westminster could put the whole thing to bed by making Shetland an offer that can’t be refused, now.

        Then they have the things they want most, for ever.

        A local referendum would seal the deal, giving London what they want and Shetland what Shetlanders want.

        Both Westminster and Holyrood have an awful lot to lose if Shetland goes with the other crowd and if you and Dougie Young get your way, there’ll be another referendum in a couple of years or maybe Holyrood will declare UDI.

        Why would Westminster wait for that to happen when they can bolt it down, now?

        If you don’t ask, you don’t get!

    • Brian Smith

      ‘Holyrood have to open up.’

      What does that mean?

      Reply
      • John Tulloch

        It means that if Scotland votes Yes in another referendum and Shetland and/or Orkney votes No, that Orkney and Shetland will have the opportunity to decide which, if any of the two, they wish to join.

        Both Scotland and the UK have much to lose from intransigence, there was once a majority of SIC councillors who were members of the Shetland Movement and that could come again. The option of full independence is there and successful templates, like Iceland, exist.

        Holyrood needs the oil now and both countries could act, immediately, to secure what will be important to them for ever – the oil industry isn’t immortal.

        However, the strategic territory, seas and airspace that go with the Northern Isles, however, will be there for as long and longer than either country lasts.

        Any side which fails to “open up” to meaningful negotiations on autonomy stands to lose the lot.

  16. Brian Smith

    ‘Orkney and Shetland will have the opportunity to decide which, if any of the two, they wish to join.’
    How will this opportunity arise?

    Reply
    • John Tulloch

      I’m. er..ah…”glad you asked me that”, …er…Brian!

      You see, there’s one teency-weency little weakness in my argument; a condition over which I have little influence must be satisfied.

      People in Shetland with influence and ability must get off their backsides and either resuscitate the old Shetland Movement or start a new independence/autonomy pressure group. I can’t guarantee that will happen but I know such people are there and have already had major impacts.

      Recent campaigns like CURE and Yes Shetland are formidable political forces and if such energies can be focused into an autonomy movement, it would have great influence.

      That’s why I called for Yes Shetland to persuade the Scottish government to look seriously at an autonomy package, within an overarching Scottish context, it’s their best, if not only, hope of winning over Shetlanders to an independent Scotland.

      That said, I would prefer to see a neutral organisation with allegiance to Shetland’s best interests, as opposed to a purely nationalist agenda.

      CURE have a major interest in autonomy, for the simple reason that, as they understand full well, the SIC’s hidden agenda for school closures is money.

      With Faroese-style autonomy, the council’s financial problems would be over and populations throughout the isles will increase – look no further than Faroe (50,000), Isle of Man (86,000), Jersey (98,000) – and school closures will end.

      Better Together have an interest, too, because if Orkney and Shetland achieve autonomy via the UK, their concerns about Scottish independence, at least, from a Shetland perspective, will be over.

      Shetland is replete with able, talented individuals. They need to be welded together into a coherent independence/autonomy movement to focus on what’s important and push it on.

      I would dearly love someone to compile a list of all sections of the community or organisations who will not benefit from Shetland becoming autonomous.

      It will be a short list.

      Reply
  17. Henry Condy

    Scotland v Poland tonight, time for some light relief, looking forward to an entertaining enjoyable match, C’mon the boys in blue

    Reply
  18. Henry Condy / 12 Loag

    Where are all the comments from the women ? ? ?

    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.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

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.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to editorial@shetlandtimes.co.uk for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.