They’ve peaked too soon (Brian Smith)

Tavish Scott and the Earl of Caithness have peaked far too soon with their Forvik-type constitutional policies for Orkney and Shetland.

Since neither of them has breathed a word about these ideas during the past 10 years, they will find it impossible to sustain discussion about them up to 2014.

Brian Smith


Add Your Comment
  • Peter Dodge

    • March 21st, 2012 19:20

    To steal a quote from one of the council prospective candidates. ” Their future lies behind them.”

  • ian tinkler

    • March 22nd, 2012 9:37

    I can not help but agree Peter, it has taken a long time for Tavish Scott and the Earl of Caithness to back my view about Shetland autonomy, however better late than never. Fortunately there is plenty of time left to expose the idiocy of Alex Salmond and his xenophobic followers and distance Shetland folk from the ruination of Scotland by extreme Socialist and Nationalist creedos.

  • Peter Dodge

    • March 22nd, 2012 13:34

    I can assure you Ian Tinkler that Alex Salmond and the trait of idiocy would not be a view to which I could adhere, although I do appreciate it to be a theme which you regularly espouse, in conjunction with the believe that Scots seeking national autonomy are of an “extreme Socialist and Nationalist creedos.”
    I further suspect that since the future autonomies I would like to see evolve in Scotland’s regions and island archipelagoes would in many features be akin to some Scandinavian (socialist?) models, they may lie diametrically opposite to your own wishes. This view being presented in the knowledge that neither Westminster or England would have little, (other than a good-neighbourly), bearing or relevance to the equitable (socialist?) aspirations I hold for my children and their offspring.
    I should perhaps add that I believe many of the aspirations of the Shetland Movement in the early 80’s have transcended the decades and whilst acknowledging that Shetland has changed in many ways, the emerging Scotland would give every impression of being at ease with these aspirations, not least because she may well share them.

  • ian tinkler

    • March 22nd, 2012 14:54

    Peter, how about Alex Salmond, a trained economist, former economic adviser to RBS forwarding congratulation to Fred Goodwin (Fred the Shred) for acquiring Dutch Bank. Great move by Alex that acquisition resulted in the greatest banking catastrophe in Scotland’s history. If that is not idiocy what is? Do you want further examples, I can give you plenty. For example preaching that Scotland should and could follow the Celtic Tiger economy of Eire, just before that economy went bankrupt, and then there was Iceland! What an idiotic economist Alex has shown himself to be. Does Shetland want him as our leader? Could we afford his incompetence and lack of judgment? Do I need to go on?

  • Tom Robinson

    • March 22nd, 2012 17:15

    For Ian Tinkler-Here is what George Osborne, the current genius Tory Chancellor
    🙂 said about Ireland just before the worldwide banking crisis::

    “A generation ago, the very idea that a British politician would go to Ireland to see how to run an economy would have been laughable. The Irish Republic was seen as Britain’s poor and troubled country cousin, a rural backwater on the edge of Europe. Today things are different. Ireland stands as a shining example of the art of the possible in long-term economic policymaking, and that is why I am in Dublin: to listen and to learn.”

    As for Darling (Labour ex-Chancellor), the RBS problems happened on his watch, and he sure did not predict them, and, indeed, would have been in a position to block the takeover of ABN AMRO had he foreseen them (unlike Salmond)

  • ian tinkler

    • March 22nd, 2012 23:23

    Tom Robinson, Why try and justify Salmond’s idiocy by highlighting Osborne and Darlings similar stupidity?. At least neither Osborne nor Darling ever had the pretention of leading Scotland Gloriana into commercial oblivion and national inconsequentiality.

  • Peter Dodge

    • March 23rd, 2012 9:48

    Noo den Ian Tinkler, dinna haud back noo, let dy sentiments really rip because so far your efforts are away down in the amateur league when it comes to insulting Scotland, Scots, SNP, Alex Salmond, + xenophobic Shetlanders et al.
    If you should feel the urge, you might wish to take some lessons from our home grown talent. The Lords Forsyth, Ffoukes, Robertson, Wallace and Steel do it so much better when expressing their contempt, loathing, hatred and venom.They have perfected it to such an extent that they get sponsored with purpose built accommodation and a very substantial financial allowance for doing so. True enough they don’t leave their London auditorium as frequently as they might when expressing their opinions but rancour and bitterness know no boundaries.
    By the way you may also wish to make a detailed study of the debt burden sustained by the citizens of the various countries of the EU. Perhaps you could publish the entire list of 27 in order that we can all see where the UK lies in comparison with Eire. (A personal opinion here, at least the Irish, like the Scots, suffer absolutely no delusions in respect of their indebtedness and their international status!).

  • Tom Robinson

    • March 23rd, 2012 10:42

    Ian Tinkler—-I would have thought those from Shetland would be more familiar than most with the success-including a mega oil fund-of Norway.

    There are no grounds whatsoever for believing that Scotland, a country of similar population and enterprise, could not duplicate that type of success which is not dependent on past imperial “glory”, now reduced to current “world power” expensive delusion.

  • Ian Tinkler

    • March 23rd, 2012 11:27

    Copy Eire, then Iceland, now Norway. What a great line fo original thought. Whichever way the SNP go with Salmonds forsight and judgement we will be begging disaster.

  • Gordon Harmer

    • March 23rd, 2012 12:49

    Tom Robinson, maybe you had not noticed but the UK including Scotland is in recession. Norway are wealthy because they had control of their oil revenue since the seventies and have built what they have now over the last forty years. For Scotland to get control of the oil revenue now when oil production and revenue are decreasing would maybe help to balance the books for a year or two.
    Scotland should have gone independent in the seventies for it to work, when the country was financially healthy and the oil had just started to flow. Also because there were few rotund, egotistic and arrogant would be dictators around in those days to mess it up and keep the Scottish electorate in the dark while feeding them spin and rhetoric.
    You nationalists all say if Norway, Ireland and others can do well so can we. When what you should be thinking is look what has happened to Greece and other countries we don’t want that here, so lets stay in the union.
    United we stand divided you fall.

  • Tom Robinson

    • March 23rd, 2012 14:08

    Ian Tinkler—Perhaps you would like to tell me a time when Norway was NOT mentioned by the SNP-how many decades ago was it?????

  • Tom Robinson

    • March 23rd, 2012 16:14

    Gordon Harmer-A little knowledge is a dangerous thing 🙂 The Norwegian oil fund only commenced in 1990, not the 1970s. It now holds about 1% of global equities for its 4.9 million people (and it is not just invested in equities, of course)

    I despise the type of unionists who only see failure in an independent Scotland’s future. For me they are epitomised by Donald Dewar, who with full knowledge of the true value of the oil, that knowledge suppressed by his government, declared (at the time that even you seem convinced that independence would have been viabke that an independent Scotland would be as poor as Bangladesh.

    Most experts in the field believe that the value (not necessarily the amount),of oil already identified (ignoring future finds) is similar to that already removed. Scottish children, grandchildren and their descendants will look back in horror 50 years from now if Scotland does not seize independence. Ludicrously, in spite of clear evidence to the contrary, the UK as a whole believes that Scotland is subsidised. How willingly will real subsidies come 50 years from now if our golden opportunity has been squandered by Westminster rather than invested in Scotland so that when oil is REALLY gone, there are replacement industries?

  • ian tinkler

    • March 23rd, 2012 18:29

    A strange question Tom Robinson, but I will give it my best shot.
    Perhaps Norway was NOT mentioned when the SNP were discussing how an independent Scotland could help to help liberate The Falklands from a dictator’s occupation?
    Perhaps Norway was NOT mentioned when the SNP were discussing how an independent Scotland could help to help stop the blood bath in Serbia?
    Perhaps Norway was NOT mentioned when the SNP were discussing how an independent Scotland could help to help limit the blood bath in Libya?
    Perhaps Norway was NOT mentioned when the SNP were discussing how an independent Scotland could help to help prevent the West being occupied and Eastern Europe freed from the tyranny of The Soviet Union during the cold war? Whoops forgot, Norway was under direct threat and part of NATO at that time.
    Perhaps Norway was NOT mentioned when the SNP were discussing how an independent Scotland could help to help free Europe from Hitler’s Nazis. Whoops forgot, Norway was invaded and occupied and heroically resisted Hitler with Shetland help…
    No maybe Tom these are all poor examples, an independent Scotland would and could do no more than observe such events. What a disgrace that would be to a once proud and once noble country.

  • Peter Dodge

    • March 25th, 2012 14:35

    So yet again the theme returns to war, war war.The supporters of Imperialist Britain are obsessed with war and engender fear of such at every opportunity to attempt to counteract the aspirations of those seeking a more peaceful future.
    Well try and come to terms with the fact that the near bankrupt UK is not a dominant military force in the world, nor has it the resources to become such. The empire is over and just like other nations Scotland and England will need at the discretion of the United Nations to interact with their neighbours and allies to play their part as and when required.
    If you are unable to come to terms with this stance perhaps you might wish to supply us with the forthcoming dates as to when Westminster is unilaterally going to proceed to occupy Syria, Iran, North Korea and China – all of course in the name of World Democracy.
    In the meantime you may wish to research and consider the remarkable aerial achievements of a certain, small, insignificant Scandinavian country in the recent Libyan conflict. Here’s a peerie prompt; that inspirational, (insignificant in British terms) small country shares a peaceful border with Germany and currently holds the Chair for the EU.
    Perhaps you might assist also in describing to we insignificant Celtic Scandinavians and Scandinavian Celts in Scotland as to why the BBC continually persist in referring to the International Afghanistan campaign as the Anglo-Afghanistan war. Similarly the re-emergence of the Falklands scenario sees that referred to as the Anglo – Argentinian situation.
    In both the First and Second World Wars the Germans referred to the Scots as England’s Mercenaries – well enough is enough, good riddance to Imperial Britain. Now crawl into the real world where computer hackers can bring a super power to its knees by the use of a keyboard and a missile can be parked down a lum can from several hundred miles away.
    By the way, the SNP are starting to build up a pretty good picture as to which of the assets in the existing UK armed forces it would be advantageous for Scotland to have ( there is of course a major discrepancy as to what Scotland has financially provided over recent years, that being significantly more from Scotland than our % proportion of the overall UK population). Can’t see us needing Trident or aircraft carriers though!

  • Gordon Harmer

    • March 25th, 2012 16:25

    Get your facts right Tom.
    With the Ekofisk discovery in 1969, the Norwegian oil adventure really began. Production from the field started on 15 June 1971, and in the following years a number of major discoveries were made. Exploration in the 1970s was confined to the area south of the 62nd parallel. The shelf was gradually opened, and only a restricted number of blocks were awarded in each licensing round. Foreign companies dominated exploration off Norway in the initial phase, and were responsible for developing the country’s first oil and gas fields. Statoil was created in 1972, and the principle of 50 percent state participation in each production licence was established. This rule was later changed so that the Storting (the Norwegian parliament) can evaluate whether the level of state participation should be lower or higher, depending on circumstances.

  • ian tinkler

    • March 26th, 2012 13:07

    Thank you for your views Peter Dodge. So you would have preferred an Independent Scotland to stand and watch Hitler desecrate Europe, Gas Millions in concentration camps, rather than have Nazi mass murderess refer to the Scotts as “England’s Mercenaries”. I feel most Scotts will be horrified with such a view, such a narrow view argues my point far more eloquently than I ever could. I thank you for that.

  • Derick Tulloch

    • March 26th, 2012 23:01

    The Full Fact site based in England gives GDP per head figures (US dollars) for
    ‘bankrupt’ Iceland ($36,718)
    ‘bankrupt Ireland ($39,750)
    Norway, poor Norway, saddled with Independence ($54,708)
    ‘World Power’ UK! ($34,511) Not of course referencing the banana republic aircraft carriers we can’t afford to buy planes for

    Ian Tinkler’s post above is a disgrace. Disgusting.

    Scots were less than 12% of the UK population, yet suffered more than 25% of British casualties in World War I .

    SNP MSP for Caithness, Sutherland and Ross Rob Gibson has called for proper recognition for those who braved their lives to serve in the Arctic convoys during World War II.

  • Peter Dodge

    • March 27th, 2012 9:26

    Ian Tinkler your insinuation in respect of Scotland facing up to Hitler, Nazis and the Holocaust is utterly repugnant, and obnoxious. The other countries of the Commonwealth were not found wanting!
    It is not the first time you have used this vile avenue to try to attack and belittle Scottish aspirations in facing up to the challenges facing all nations.
    I repeat my previous statement. The empire is over and just like other nations, Scotland and England will need at the discretion of the United Nations to interact with their neighbours and allies to play their part as and when required.
    As to whether Scotland as a sovereign nation would have entered the Iraq conflict without a U.N. mandate provides a recent moot scenario. Further contemporary situations are developing ominously and rapidly but be under no illusions that the UK Government in Westminster fairly represents the views of the average Scot on these matters. Despite what Michael Moore, Danny Alexander or David Mundell might tell you.

  • ian tinkler

    • March 27th, 2012 10:30

    Mr. Dodge I made no insinuation. I stated an absolute matter of fact. An independent Scotland outside NATO would be as powerless as a castrated haggis to stand up to any tyranny that the future might hold. Salmond’s vision for Scotland literally fills me with dread. I make absolutely no apology for that. Salmond’s and your endless xenophobic (anti English) attacks on Westminster are really warring a bit thin. Holyrood is just as distant and irrelevant to Shetland as Westminster is to Scotland politically. However the United Kingdom has a record of withstanding aggression and tyranny Which ever Scot, Welshman, Irishman and Englishman can be proud. Let Salmond destroy this Union if you must, but do not drag Shetlanders into the insignificant little state Salmond’s Scotland will become

  • ian tinkler

    • March 27th, 2012 12:34

    “SNP MSP for Caithness, Sutherland, and Ross Rob Gibson has called for those who braved their lives to serve in the Arctic convoys during World War II”. How very brave of Ross Rob Gibson. A really cynical PR move whilst trying to remove Scotland from the United Kingdom and NATO. It was mostly United Kingdom and British Commonwealth sailors whom served in the RN, RNVR and Merchant Navy during that battle. Scotland will have no RN or RNR under Salmond, just a few gun boats. For information the highest casualty rate per head of population during WW2 occurred among Shetland men, mostly in the Merchant Navy, serving the whole of the UK in the Battle of the Atlantic… Has SNP MSP for Caithness, Sutherland and Ross Rob Gibson called for proper recognition of them also or are they outside his propaganda remit?


Add 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 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.

200 words left

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Get Latest News in Your Inbox

Join the The Shetland Times mailing list to get one daily email update at midday on what's happening in Shetland.