What Do Others Think of the Scots?

Recently, I did a post that asked the question ‘Why to People Dislike the English?’ In the interest of balance I think we should now look at the Scots.

What do the people of other countries think of us? Do they like or dislike us? If so, do we bring it on ourselves?

Finding out other people’s true opinion of you is never an easy thing. This was recognised by Burns when he wrote:

O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!

This enquiry was triggered by the recent story about the Scottish Government complaining about how Scots are often portrayed in Germany as penny-pinchers, with the rock-bottom price usually described as the Schottenpreis. Personally, I was surprised at the complaint, as I’ve always regarded this marketing device as a reflection of the Lutheran admiration for their Calvinist cousins’ supposed thrifty ways and, as they say, any publicity is good publicity. It is certainly not meant as hostile.

I therefore set out to conduct a survey. I should admit up front that my approach was fairly unscientific and consisted mainly of getting people drunk and asking them questions.

The first part of my survey is based on what I managed to extract from my English cousin. It should be stressed that he’s a proud Yorkshireman, so he sees England somewhat as an outsider. He was at pains to point out that this is not what he personally thinks, but merely what he understands how many of his countrymen feel, many of whom he considers ‘soft southern bastards’. Regardless, this is what I managed to get out of him after four beers.

Apparently, many English men and women see Scots as:

1. Dour
2. Sanctimonious
3. Anti-English
4. People who drink too much
5. Parasitic and ungrateful for English generosity
6. Socialistic
7. Grasping
8. ‘Chippy’, i.e. having a chip on the shoulder (whatever that means)
9. Argumentative, as if constantly on the verge of aggression
10. Constantly boasting about Scotland’s achievements


Having read the opinion pages of the Spectator and Telegraph, this is pretty much what I expected. So I decided to try this on some other friends. These were French, Spanish, Norwegian and Irish. I stressed that the important thing was to say what they thought of Scots in general, not just about me. I should also point out that this survey was carried out in Glasgow, so Edinburgh or Aberdeen folk might give a different result. I asked them to be brutally honest, and to not worry about my feelings. This is not a proper survey, as these were people who had come to Scotland as enthusiastic visitors, and so were already well disposed towards me. Either way, here is the list of how some Europeans see the Scots, in no particular order:

1. Friendly
2. Honest, with a strong sense of what’s right and wrong
3. Hospitable
4. Surprisingly generous, ‘considering what we have heard.’
5. Proud, often passionate about their history, which as visitors they find fascinating
6. Seem to place a lot of importance on drinking to relax and meet people
7. Anti-English
8. Like to debate when people might just want to talk
9. Direct and plainspoken, sometimes to the point of tactlessness


Some Observations
Note the attributes that did not come up in the Euro survey: dour, parasitic, socialistic, grasping, chippy, boastful.

Note too the qualities that are not recognised by the English in the Scots: friendly, hospitable, direct and plainspoken, generous.

So do we put on a different face for the English? Or do we have more in common with our European neighbours? Or perhaps is there some truth to the idea that every observation is an expression of difference, not of an absolute quality? That an observation can say as much about the observer as the subject? For example, I know a Frenchman who thinks the English are two faced, mainly because their smiles are not necessarily invitations to friendship. The Englishman would see this as French surliness, which is not a far cry from a perception of dourness in the Scots.

And note also which of the Euro-observed qualities an Englishman might interpret as something else:

A. ‘Honest with a strong sense of what’s right and wrong’: could be easily seen as ‘sanctimonious’ by someone who does not feel they have to demonstrate their honesty, or by someone from a culture where deceit is admired as cunning and guile.

B. ‘Like to debate’ could easily be interpreted as ‘argumentative’ by someone more used to the wishy-washy pass-the-tea-vicar conversations on the weather that often pass for conversation in England.

C. ‘Proud, often passionate about their history’ might easily be seen as ‘chippy’ if that pride is at variance to the Englishman’s opinion of Scotland as a cultural and historical vacuum with nothing to brag about, and he is tired of having his long-held school-taught prejudices corrected. This reminds me of how, in the pre-Civil Rights America, white Southerners used to describe proud blacks who asserted their equality as ‘uppity’.


It makes you wonder whether English attitudes to Scots are based on:

- Scotland’s currently perceived parasitic economic situation vis à vis England,
- Long held English prejudices constantly stoked by their media (1) and education system, or
- How Scots do indeed react sometimes to Englishmen.


Note, however, the qualities that came up in both surveys: anti-English and drinking too much. Maybe there’s something to these after all. They do say the first step in getting help is admitting you’ve got a problem.

Personally, I consider the anti-English thing as a form of frustrated Scottish national identity, the natural result of four hundred years of being told your culture is inferior to another, and resenting it. (2) If that situation were to end, the sentiment would surely fade with time.

What I don’t agree with is the common English assertion, based on a complete ignorance of the subject, that Scottish nationalism is anti-English or xenophobic. If it were, it would not be enjoying its current popularity as a movement. Neither would this explain why so many English people in Scotland support it. Or the English members of the SNP. If anything, the SNP message to Scots seems to be ‘check your anglophobia at the door’.

Bring on independence and mutual respect.

UPDATE

Dana Linnet: This country is spoiling me
Obama’s woman in Scotland is diplomatic to the core, heaping praise on her new home nation




Notes

(1) I read this just today in the Times: Alex Salmond was ‘brash, self-righteous and a little bit chippy’ in an article about the proposed referendum on Scottish independence. See Gillian Bowditch, ‘Policy dressed in tartan shows a lack of culture,’ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6907837.ece TimesOnline, 8 November 2009

(2) This is recognised by historians as a direct result of the Scottish crown moving to England in 1603, and taking the Scottish cultural elite with it.

Operation 'Scorched Earth': Progress Report

Another fresh leak from my source in Westminster: this was received in the form of a typed memo, printed off on a blank white sheet of paper with no letterhead. The italics refer to handwritten notes made on the page.






Status of Operation 'Scorched Earth'
July 31, 2009
PRESENT: GB, AD, JM.

Only Lurch and Ali-D could make it. Fat George is too busy making bloody FOI requests!

Original Action Plan from July, 2007:

1. Starve Scotland of funds, making it look as if the Scottish Govt {^Executive} is picking fights and always asking for more.
STATUS: Ali-D says he is tightening the screws. It might backfire and lead to independence, but ok so far – and what the hell have we got to lose, anyway? Role of subservient Scottish press proving crucial.

NOTE: Talk to secretary about not using the phrase 'Scottish Govt'.

2. Work with other Unionist parties to block all Nat legislation in their pathetic minority government.
STATUS: Not working! Bastard Tories, Greens and LibDems won’t play ball, and seem to be making deals with the Nats to pander to their electorates.

3. Maintain UK policy of keeping the West of Scotland poor, maintaining Labour loyalty from section of population on benefit.
DANGER. Strategy seems to be failing – no longer possible with Nats in power. Seem to be getting their message through that Glasgow could be better off without us. Nats’ populist health and transport policies a blatant attempt at giving Scotland better services than England!
FURTHER ACTION: Lurch to continue to reveal the cynical nationalist agenda that lies behind the Nats’ economic strategy. If all else fails, see next point.

4. Keep a tight hold of by-elections in Scotland, using ‘enabling’ machinery to win every by-election, regardless of the result.
STATUS: Screwed up in Glasgow East, but Lurch says Glenrothes proves we’ve got it under control.
FURTHER ACTION: Lurch says Nats may be onto our methods, but putting Glasgow North East back to November should give us time to do whatever it takes to ‘take care’ of things.

5. Use influence to persuade UK Electoral Commission to turn a blind eye to postal vote anomalies in Scottish by-elections.
DONE.

6. Ignore all demands for transferring control of Scottish elections to the Scottish Govt. {^Executive}
STATUS: WORKING.

7. Keep the Scottish press churning out our press releases verbatim, with a Labour & Unionist slants on all other news. Impossible in England, but relatively easy in Scotland with fewer outlets and almost no Tory press.
STATUS: NEEDS ATTENTION. Lurch says the blatant Unionist slant in the Scottish press is becoming too obvious. Editors of the Scotsman, Herald and Daily Record are apparently complaining that their unswerving Unionist bias on every subject under the sun is becoming ‘tediously obvious’, alienating traditional readership and causing their circulations to ‘freefall’.
FURTHER ACTION: Lurch to have a word with the editors to explore further ways to secretly subsidise them via advertising.

8. Fund Scottish Unionist bloggers to counter Nat lies about Scotland’s self-sufficiency or any successes of the Scottish Govt {^Executive}.
STATUS: NEEDS ATTENTION. Unionist bloggers complaining they aren’t getting any advertising revenue, which is dependent on their sites getting a high number of hits, which are almost non-existent.
FURTHER ACTION: Lurch to increase subsidies via ‘consultancy fees,’ and find ways to increase hits without more actual readers.

9. Build infrastructure to allow the UK to take the oil direct to England in case the Nats pull off independence.

DONE.

Should teach Scotland not to betray Labour, and prove once and for all that Scotland isn’t a viable state – exactly what we said all along!

10. Grab Scotland’s lottery money so that their Commonwealth Games in 2014 look like mince compared to England’s {^Britain’s} Olympic Games in 2012.
DONE.
NOTE: tell my secretary again the difference between England & Britain. I'm sick of explaining it to the dozy tart!

11. Put pressure on Scottish Sportsmen and women to declare their Britishness. Use press, TV and honours to bring them to heel.
STATUS: WORKING: Pretty Boy Hoy and Murray under control. No longer upsetting the English with their Scottish identity.
FURTHER ACTION: Some sports apparently already separated. Doesn’t seem to be any rule about which ones we compete in as British. Talk to MCG about possibility of England cricket team competing as 'Britain'.

12. Explore ways to get polling companies to issue doctored polls on lack of Scottish desire for independence.
STATUS: BBC seems to have remembered which side their bread is buttered and now pulling their weight. Last poll looked good. Shitting themselves that the Tories will get in and cut them back to just BBC1 and Radio 4! Would serve the back-stabbing bastards right!

13. Scottish press to persuade Scots they don’t want independence, and that a referendum is a waste of time in such difficult/ bountiful economic times (delete as appropriate). Demoralise ordinary Scots into accepting the status quo.
DANGER: Lurch warns that a general engagement in politics in Scotland is growing, and that the message that the referendum is a waste of time is starting to fall on deaf ears.
FURTHER ACTION: Lurch to talk to Fat George about continuing to sow FUD on separation/ isolation/ building barriers /dependency via Scottish press to counter the Nat’s cynical message of re-entering the world community of nations/ removing barriers to dealing with the world directly/ ending oil subsidies to England / Scotland's wealth in natural resources.

14. Spin news to make Scots believe their economy is dependent on British military contracts.
STATUS: NOT SURE IF WORKING. Scottish press playing the game but the Nats are on to us. Lurch recently tried to make it look like he saved a big contract, but Nats successful in showing that Lurch did bugger all. Lurch says Nats got the message through that the Tories could still cancel it.
FURTHER ACTION: Lurch to stay on message. Those with defence jobs might still vote Labour from fear of losing them.

Additional Item

15. Respond to Calman Commission findings.
STATUS: Lurch reassures me his fancy footwork to distance us from calamity Calman is working.
FURTHER ACTION: Delay response to findings until it is forgotten. Leave the Tories to deal with it, which means it'll never happen.

Special Note: All meeting actions henceforth to be approved by PM.
Still waiting for the Pink Baron to grant me an audience. Said he was too busy with all his committee work for ‘stupid Scotch stuff.’ Have left him four messages. Secretaries Brett and Hans say he’s tied up in an important debriefing.

Misc Personal Stuff

1. Talk to EU about possible presidential role after election/referendum defeat.

2. Get CV up to date.

English vs. Scottish Press Freedom

The recent exposure of MP’s expense perks is destined to go down as one of the greatest moments in English media history. I suspect the Telegraph felt that they had to win back the middle ground of relevance after the blogger Guido reminded them what their job is supposed to be.

I particularly loved Frank Skinner’s comments as he mused aloud on why on earth MPs need second jobs:





Yet again, it takes a comedian to talk truth to power (see my post on Jon Stewart).

Then I had a look at the expenses claimed by region and noticed a common factor – nearly all of the MPs had claimed for an assistant.

It would appear that the primary purpose of the political assistant is to free up the MPs’ time to earn more money outside Parliament. It’s certainly not to make them more accessible to their electorate.

The thing that impressed me most was the Telegraph’s new-found willingness to attack the system, of which it is very much a part. Then I remembered something I stumbled across when I was putting together another post recently:

Media freedom is well established in the UK and media coverage of the [2005 General Election] campaign was extensive. There are many print and electronic media outlets that freely and actively cover election campaigns, and the electorate is generally offered a range of views and information. (1)

Anyone who has bought a newspaper in Scotland in the past few years will probably think that a piece of political black humour. The Scottish Parliament might seem squeaky clean compared to the British one, but as far as press freedom goes, the English are putting Scotland to shame.

The behaviour of the Scottish press throughout this British expenses scandal has been deplorable. (See Moridura’s post) Day after day they find something negative to say about the Scottish Government alongside the British story, rather than simply report the truth – that their beloved Union of Great Britain is falling apart at the seams.

What does it take for a team of patriotic Scots millionaires to join forces to create a half-decent Scottish newspaper? Do I have to name names? Yes, it could have a Scottish perspective on what is going on in the world, but what on earth is wrong with that? Every other country in the world has. And I'm not talking about being pro-SNP.

If the group's first act were to take over the Herald and the Scotsman, it would inherit their established distribution networks, and would have access to an army of ex-journalists, freed from the shackles of British Unionist management, no longer prevented from saying what they really want to say. With the Herald and Scotsman eliminated, it would quickly establish itself as Scotland's national newspaper.

Once it has built a readership, it could switch to a tabloid format to win over the Daily Record readers with sport, and could cover national (i.e. Scottish), European and international news, entertainment and movie stars, and have a section on what Scots are doing around the world. I’d bet that even bloggers would be willing to contribute the odd opinion piece for free, or some original research - now that Guido has made us respectable. The important thing is that it would contain real news and original research. Anything is better than the zombie Labour spin we are getting now.

There are strong moral reasons for doing this too, and, as my father used to say, “Ye cannae tak it wi ye.”

Gentlemen, it's time to play your part. You know who you are.

Your country needs you. And it will be remembered.







References

1. This is an excerpt from the EU OSCE/ODIHR observer report on the 2005 General Election, p13
http://www.osce.org/odihr-elections/15922.html

Whatever It Takes

Lately I’ve been watching the British news with what can only be described as morbid fascination. Will the rump of the Empire survive its present woes, or are we witnessing the death throws of the artificial construct that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland? I’m not the first to ask this question: political commentators, investment analysts and historians (1) have been predicting Britain’s inevitable demise for decades. My goal here is to summarise the political forces for both cohesion and disintegration, and to speculate on how the existing British state might counter these political threats to its existence. 

The array of constitutional forces tearing at the fabric of the British state is truly staggering. At one end of the tug-o-war are limbering up the combined forces of disunity – the movements for English (2), Scottish (3) and Welsh (4) independence. Two of the team members have a youthful, steely demeanour, but are wary of the third whose heart does not seem in it. At the other end of the rope are three middle-aged men. One is muttering about the need for English votes for English laws (5), another is an academic type arguing about the case for a devolved English parliament within Britain (6), while the third is a Unionist Scot, pleading with the others to pull harder in a celebration of British identity. He falls silent when he realises the others are not listening.(7)

English demands for change are of course being whipped up by elements of her right wing press, outraged at having to foot the bill for subsidy-scrounging Scots (8) and bailing out her banks.(9) The motivation for these articles would seem to be to sell newspapers, but their half-baked arguments cut no ice with Scottish nationalists, who are all well versed in the facts: it’s a long time since ‘Scottish’ Banks were Scottish run, and tax earned on Scottish oil revenues has subsidised England for 35 years to the tune of £250billion ($360billion).(10) Indeed, the dependence of Britain on Scotland’s oil was stripped bare during the Grangemouth strike of 2008.(11) The irony is that these anti-Scottish rants play right into the hands of Scottish nationalists, who I sometimes think must be behind the stories themselves, causing as they do so many pro-Union Scots to question how much common cause they have with Englishmen. If nothing else, independence would certainly end all debate about who’s sponging off whom.

Should it happen, it would be a traumatic event for British Unionists to see Scotland go, and for several reasons. I believe their fear has four distinct components: loss of identity, loss of personal income, loss of status, and fear of change. All four anxieties scream in unison in the Unionist politician. You can hear the hate and fear rising in the throat of British PM Gordon Brown when he says he will do “whatever it takes” to preserve the Union.(12) Ominous stuff, but what does he mean? Just what is he prepared to do?

An intriguing factor is the correlation between the survival instincts of the Labour Party and the British state: should Scotland become independent, Labour is almost certainly facing political oblivion for a generation in Little Britain, if not for good. You can be sure Labour party strategists understand exactly what is at stake and have not been complacent: key by-election results have been rigged (13), and attempts to reform the electoral system are routinely ignored or headed off, with proportional representation kept in reserve as a rearguard action.(14)

As for the Tories, the stench of desperation is absent. They seem much more ambivalent to the prospect of an independent Scotland, probably because they stand to hold power for many years if Scotland goes its own way. And although Eton Rifle (15) and PM-in-waiting David Cameron has also stated he will do “everything in his power” to preserve the Union, personal ambition has a lot to do with his stance. “I want to be PM of the whole UK!” he announced recently, sounding more like a spoilt child stamping his feet in the toy department of Harrods than a statesman.(16) I suspect Cameron’s sentiment is closer to that of middle England than Brown’s cornered rat snarl. You get the sense that Cameron will do anything as long as it’s legal, whereas Brown will simply do anything. You can see Cameron’s point too, or at least his thinking. How could Little Britain continue to tell others how to run their affairs? And what about her status on the international stage (17), and her seat at the UN Security Council?

So much for the politicians, but what about Whitehall? Just how far would the state machinery go to save UK Inc? You can bet your soon-to-bottom dollar that the Whitehall minions know exactly where they stand should Scotland go her own way, and though I would be surprised if they stand back and let it happen, I would, however, be astonished if force is used to keep her. Yes, it would secure what is left of the oil reserves for London, but as a strategy it would be too stupid and too obvious for words, laying the foundations for a British civil war that would take generations to put out. England, land of cricket, fair play and twitching curtains, doing the dirty on her former partner in Empire, with the world watching on? I just can’t see it happening.

No, the most likely outcome is that the unelected faceless monolith of the Whitehall civil service and the UK security services will continue to work the old ways, using every underhand clandestine trick in the book, carefully deployed over time to sap the Scottish will for independence. Whitehall was certainly complicit when the true extent of Scottish oil revenues was suppressed in 1975 to avoid stoking the nationalist fires.(18)

Frustrating Scottish independence would also appear to be within the remit of MI5’s Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure.(19) MI5 is known to have infiltrated the SNP in the 1950s (20), and has played a active part in the fostering of independence movements in the Orkneys and Shetlands since the 1970s, however unsuccessfully.(21) The political infiltration and interference will no doubt continue, but I seriously doubt there will be a return to the heavy-handed tactics of the 1980s and the assassination of a key Scottish nationalist by Special Branch(22):

On the other hand, given that the British government has done its best to deny it ever happened, and the fact that the agents are probably still on the payroll, anything is possible.

The bottom line is that Whitehall will have its hands full over the next few years, with or without Scottish independence. Even if it manages to remain intact politically, Britain is about to endure a barrage of economic woes: depression, hyper-inflation (23) and the collapse of sterling (24) are widely predicted. And should Scotland become independent – even if hyperinflation could be avoided and sterling saved – the rump state of Britain would be an impoverished shadow of its former self, stripped of any means to repay the truly gigantic national debt that has been accrued.(25)

Or would it? Perhaps the mandarins of Whitehall have already seen the writing on the wall. They would seem to be planning for every eventuality: in the event the Scots do break free, the Scotland-England sea border has been surreptitiously relocated north, moving many formerly Scottish oil and gas fields into English waters.(26)

Sir Humphrey likes to hedge his bets, you have to give him that.

Notes

(1) As the historian Norman Davies said in 1999, ‘I happen to belong to a minority who hold that the breakup of the United Kingdom may be imminent.’ See Davies, The Isles, Oxford, 1999, p1053

See also Tom Nairn, The Break-Up of Britain: crisis and neonationalism, London, 1977

(2) For the movement for English independence see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_independence

(3) Currently scheduled for late 2010. Should either Holyrood opposition parties or Westminster either sabotage it or prevent it from taking place, a free and fair referendum will become the central issue in the Scottish election the following year. See http://www.snp.org/issues/manifestos/holyrood

(4) Welsh independence does not seem as popular as the the English and Scottish varieties. http://www.politics.co.uk/briefings-guides/issue-briefs/legal-and-constitutional/welsh-independence-$366564.htm

(5) English votes for English laws’: See Alan Cochrane, ‘Devolution gives English votes for English laws’, Daily Telegraph, Dec 13, 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643053/Devolution-gives-English-votes-for-English-laws.html

(6) Even left wing intellectuals have recognised the case for an English parliament as a democratic necessity. George Monbiot, ‘Someone Else’s England,’ Guardian, Feb 2, 2009. http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/02/17/someone-elses-england

(7) Patrick Wintour, “Brown: Remembrance Sunday should become ‘British Day’”, Guardian, January 14, 2006, https://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/jan/14/britishidentity.labour

(8) The Daily Express is a good example, stirring up discontent in middle England. See Jimmy Young, ‘Cameron Must Rally England in Revolt Against Scottish Perks,’ Daily Express, Aug 12, 2007.

Those in power have not been shy in pandering to this sentiment. See Gerri Peev, ‘London “Subsidising Scots Lifestyle”, says Livingstone,’ Scotsman, June 7 2006

(9) For example, Dominic Lawson’s intolerant rant: ‘A Sorry Tale of Scottish Shame – and English Tolerance,’ Independent, Feb 17, 2009

(10) The figures at http://www.oilofscotland.org/ depend on whether you consider the oil to be Scotland’s. But as Ken Livingstone, former Lord Mayor of London, has said, “It’s most probably true that Scotland subsidises the rest of Britain if you take into account a classic international law interpretation of who the oil belongs to.” Quoted from Magnus Linklater, ‘Before you start laying into those subsidy junkies . . .: Defending the Scots against English bile,’ TimesOnline, June 27, 2007

(11) ‘Strike to Close Key Oil Pipeline,’ BBC, April 25, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7366367.stm

(12) Patrick Hennessy, ‘Brown Won’t Let Union Split,’ Daily Telegraph, May 10, 2008

(13) Jill Sherman, “Massive voting reform needed to block fraud loopholes”, TimesOnline, August 17, 2008.

A public enquiry has also been launched into the disappearance of the Glenrothes electoral register, which would have shown who actually voted in the by-election of Nov 08. See Robbie Dinwoodie, ‘Demand for enquiry as Glenrothes by-election register is lost,’ Herald, Feb 4, 2009.

(14) Peter Facey, ‘Electoral Reform after the Review: where now?’, Jan 25, 2008 http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/2008/01/25/electoral-reform-after-the-review-where-now/

(15) A youth military cadet group at the famous school. Cameron was a member of this group at Eton, and even likes the song by the Jam, much to the disbelief of Paul Weller. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eton_Rifles

(16) David Cameron, “I Would Govern Scots With Respect,’ Scotland on Sunday, Feb 8, 2009

(17) Jack Straw, govt MP: ‘Our voting power in the European Union would diminish. We'd slip down in the world league GDP tables. Our case for staying in the G8 would diminish and there could easily be an assault on our permanent seat in the UN Security Council.’ Quoted from ‘Jack Straw Q & A,’ BBC Question Time, Sept 28, 2006.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/5388078.stm

(18) Ben Russel & Paul Kelbie, ‘How black gold was hijacked: North sea oil and the betrayal of Scotland,’ Independent, Dec 9, 2005. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/how-black-gold-was-hijacked-north-sea-oil-and-the-betrayal-of-scotland-518697.html

(19) MI5’s Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure has the authority to ‘protect national security by helping to reduce the vulnerability of the national infrastructure to terrorism and other threats’ (my emphasis). The nature of these ‘other threats’ is not stated. https://www.cpni.gov.uk/about

(20) See Marc Horne, ‘Files prove that MI5 spied on SNP’, Scotland On Sunday, September 16, 2007.

(21) Magnus Linklater & George Rosie, 'Secret Plan to Deprive Independent Scotland of North Sea Oil Fields,' TimesOnline, Feb 14, 2009

(22) The suspicious circumstances surrounding the murder even reached pro-Labour govt tabloid Daily Record, probably as a swing at Margaret Thatcher: Reg Mckay, ‘The McRae Mystery,’ Daily Record, Oct 19, 2007.
 https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/special-reports/crimes-that-rocked-scotland/2007/10/19/the-mcrae-mystery-86908-19978476/

(23) Heather Stewart, ‘Bank of England governor paves way for “quantitative easing”’ Guardian, January 20, 2009. Various market forecasters have predicted this will end in hyperinflation. For example: https://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article7526.html

 

(24) Graham Tibbetts, “Gordon Brown risks 'collapse of sterling' says George Osborne”, Daily Telegraph, Nov 15, 2008

(25) Ashley Seager and Nicholas Watt, ‘Bailouts add £1.5 trillion to Britain's public debt,’ Guardian, Feb 20, 2009, https://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/20/public-debt-gordon-brown

(26) In 1999, several hundred square miles of Scottish territorial waters were quietly moved into English jurisdiction by a private Westminster committee vote. No vote was taken in the house. See Craig Murray "Scotland/England Maritime Boundaries", https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/01/scotlandengland-maritime-boundaries/