Crowd hears Ewing independence speech in Sandwick

What sort of country do you want to live in? That question was the principle message of Scottish government energy minister Fergus Ewing at a meeting at Carnegie Hall in Sandwick on Monday night prior to a Tuesday meeting with Shetland political leaders.

Mr Ewing was keen to emphasise that the forthcoming referendum on Scottish independence is not about personalities – whether Alex Salmond or Alistair Darling – but about splitting Scotland from the other UK countries to offer greater democratic control of our political and economic futures.

“It’s not about Alex Salmond and it’s not about Nicola Sturgeon. We will not be in power forever, I would not have thought, but don’t quote me on that,” said Mr Ewing on a theme that was to be repeated – the need to concentrate on the big questions rather than politicians or even political parties – vote Yes in the referendum and you may well have seen the last SNP government, it was suggested.

He warned people not to cast their votes for trivial reasons. “Independence is much bigger than any one party. Do not cast your votes on the basis of whether you like Alex Salmond or Alistair Darling. The crux of it all is what sort of country do you want to be?”

Fergus Ewing addresses the crowd in Sandwick. Photo: Peter Johnson
Fergus Ewing addresses the crowd in Sandwick. Photo: Peter Johnson

In Mr Ewing’s opinion, Scotland should eliminate the scourge of poverty and abolish pay day loans, which Westminster, almost uniquely among “advanced countries”, had failed to do. The bedroom tax, which was “beyond the pale” would be quickly be scrapped too if the SNP had the power, he added.

In fact, Mr Ewing started his speech with the burning yes or no question: have you recovered from the South Mainland Up-Helly-A’ yet? That raised a few titters but he soon launched into a discourse on the advantages of independence, one of which was the superiority of Scots at co-operating and ironically “working better together”.

Winning independence will not be easy, he told the 30-odd audience, but nothing in life worth having is ever achieved without a lot of hard work and effort. Meeting chairman Brian Nugent certainly made the effort – he missed Albion Rovers’ “once in every 93 years” Scottish cup semi-final with Rangers to attend.

Mr Ewing early on made the case for Viking Energy’s planned wind farm. Along with the host of other renewable projects Shetland could sustain, it promises to bring in £30 million to the local economy and will provide the momentum for an inter-connector which will be necessary for all other green projects to connect to the national grid. “Shetland is the windiest part of Scotland, if not the western hemisphere,” Mr Ewing stated, though it was only blowing a gentle Force 5 outside the hall.

It was shameful, he added, that so many people in the Highlands and Islands were living in fuel poverty, many in old, traditionally built houses, when the entire country, and especially Shetland, is sitting on a treasure chest of renewable heat sources.

Mr Ewing turned to another “tragedy” – the lack of an oil fund for Shetland, Scotland, and, indeed, the rest of the UK after 40 years of North Sea oil and the quite astronomical figure of £300 billion of oil tax which has gone to prop up the ailing economy. The only other country in the world that had its own oil industry for so long and had not set up such a fund, was Iraq, Mr Ewing pointed out.

“It’s a tremendous lost opportunity that this money has not been spent on the people of Scotland and south of the border,” he added.

“Respected oil and gas leader”, Sir Ian Wood reported recently that the industry had been bedevilled by fiscal instability and a licensing and regulatory regime so poor that it should immediately be taken over by a new, independent regulator. This was hardly an endorsement of the stewardship of the industry under the UK government.

Mr Ewing said that one of the underplayed benefits of independence was making your own decisions on big issues – like going to war. Britain had three times gone to war in the last three decades – twice in Iraq and once in Afghanistan, and Mr Ewing questioned whether an independent Scotland would have participated in any of these ventures. The Liberal-Conservative coalition had also been minded to go to war in Syria, only to lose the vote in Parliament. “The decision to go to war is one that I would like us to have a say over, which we do not have at the moment,” he added.

Mr Ewing said that the Scottish Parliament had generally been a success since it was established in 1989, and was improving with age. His mother Winnie, incidentally a great lover of Up-Helly-A’, had reconvened the Scottish Parliament and was still the only person who could tell Alex Salmond what to do. The SNP had also done most of the things it had set out to do on coming to power – a council tax freeze, concessionary travel for senior citizens and the abolition of prescription charges. At the same time the Scottish government had to balance the public purse, which was difficult when you could neither borrow nor print money. The SNP government had also been serious about doing its bit personally – government employees earning more than £22,000 had had a wage freeze since 2007.

The government had helped small businesses by reducing rates. “If we can use these powers reasonably well running our own affairs, why cannot we do better running them with the full range of powers.”

Travel was one of the most pressing issues for islands, Mr Ewing said. The cost of transport had been in general terms far too high and “we would like see the introduction of measures to tackle that.” The abolition of air passenger duty in Ireland had seen Ryanair take one-million more passengers in the first year, there was no reason that stimulus could not be applied in Scotland.

On the question of currency, Mr Ewing said that the pound sterling was jointly owned by all the UK countries and that the Bank of England was “as English as Scotland Yard was Scottish”.

These arguments from the no campaign had been aimed at engineering a state of fear which had been quite damaging to genuine debate, he claimed.

“In conclusion,” said Mr Ewing, “I have a five-year-old daughter and want her to grow up in a country where we decide what we do as regards contributing to the world’s affairs. I want her to grow up in a country where everyone can feel equal and can get an education irrespective of how rich or poor they are and, finally, grow up in an independent country that takes its own decisions on its own affairs.”

For more from the Carnegie Hall meeting, including questions from the audience, see Friday’s Shetland Times.


Add Your Comment
  • John Tulloch

    • March 18th, 2014 20:17

    “It was shameful, he (Fergus Ewing) added, that so many people in the Highlands and Islands were living in fuel poverty, many in old, traditionally built houses, when the entire country, and especially Shetland, is sitting on a treasure chest of renewable heat sources.”

    Yes, it is shameful that:

    1. So many people, all over Scotland, are living in fuel poverty.

    2. That Mr Ewing’s “treasure chest of renewable heat sources” is in fact an ever-expanding financial ‘black hole’ into which these ill-off people’s shrinking resources are being poured.

    3. That the SNP government is responsible for the creation and burgeoning expansion of that financial black hole.

    4. That the man, Fergus Ewing, who uttered the above words has presided over the whole renewable energy lunacy, including the passing of planning consent for the Viking Energy wind farm whose electricity will cost two and a half times its equivalent from coal and which, by all accounts, doesn’t even include the reported billion pounds for installing a submarine cable to carry the energy South.

    Perhaps the Scottish government will put up the billion pounds for the submarine cable? If not, then who will pay for it other than the already fuel-poverty-ridden consumers?


  • Michael Davies

    • March 19th, 2014 11:42

    I didn’t like what Fergus Ewing said before the meeting, in a quiet comment on the petition for referenda on the status of Shetland, Orkney and the Western Isles.

    This petition was published yesterday by the Scottish parliament and people can sign it here:

    Mr Ewing said that probably the “usual suspects” were suggesting joining Norway. That might sound terribly humorous in Edinburgh or London. But if he knew anything about Shetland, he’d know that nobody is seriously suggesting joining Norway. But the other options have many supporters, and the idea of a referendum on our status is very serious indeed. It isn’t a joke. If he has respect for us, then he should let us decide.

    Already 125 people have signed the petition. Supporters of a referendum are invited to send the link to people you know. Set up Facebook groups. Spread the word.

    All the signs are that the petition will be successful and that the Scottish Government will have to allow referenda in the islands on 25 Sep, 1 week after the Scottish referendum.

    People will be able to choose whether Shetland

    1) becomes an independent country, or
    2) stays in Scotland

    If the result of the Scottish referendum was yes, we will also get the following additional option:

    3) leave Scotland and stay in the remainder of the UK

    I can’t see how anybody can seriously oppose this. Islanders should decide the status of their islands – full stop. All serious options are on the table. That’s just how it should be.

    So please, sign the petition. Let’s get the referendum arranged for 25 Sep. Then let the real discussion begin, here on the islanders. The question of Scotland’s status shouldn’t be decided in England. The question of Shetland’s status shouldn’t be decided in Edinburgh.

    So please sign the petition, whichever option you prefer for Shetland’s status!

    • Brian Smith

      • March 19th, 2014 15:36

      How will the health service be organised in an ‘independent country’ of Shetland?

      • Ali Inkster

        • March 19th, 2014 19:12

        I would Invite BUPA to open a hospital with a centre specialising in whatever they want and use the oil money to get all Shetlanders top of the range cover. In one fell swoop our nurses and other health care professionals would get a pay rise and we would get health care second to none with no waiting lists.

      • Ali Inkster

        • March 19th, 2014 19:20

        And when I say oil money Brian I mean proceeds from production from 2:30pm to 3:00pm one Sunday afternoon during summer shutdown.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 19th, 2014 19:31

        A few suggestions of broad principles which spring to an admittedly ‘uninitiated’ mind, Brian:

        The funding arrangements would be different because, if independent, Shetlanders will pay no more taxes direct to the Scottish/UK government so the money will either come from Shetland’s own tax receipts and/or private health insurance.

        The manner of funding i.e. Public/private mix and the amount spent would be decided by the democratically elected Shetland government, as opposed to by Westminster or Holyrood.

        Management of the service would be broadly in the way envisaged at present with NHS-run and SIC-run services merging under a common management unit analogous to the present NHS Shetland Board but, crucially, under local democratic control.

        Services provided locally would be determined locally by the new Shetland ‘health board’ in on a basis of medical need/priority and cost-effectiveness and special treatments which, like now, are not available, would be contracted at NHS specialist units like Aberdeen’s Forrester Hill, private hospitals or, even, abroad as is currently done routinely by the UK NHS to reduce waiting lists at home.

        In many ways the health service may well be easier to organise when decisions on local services can be taken locally, on the basis of local criteria, without interference from politicians or mandarins in either Edinburgh or London, as the alternative case might be.

      • Brian Smith

        • March 19th, 2014 21:08

        Goodness, there appears to be a major fracture in the Shetland independence campaign already.

  • Thomas McDonald

    • March 19th, 2014 14:32

    165 signatures now. Not bad, for a petition that only opened for signatures yesterday.


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.