Ten Scottish issues you will NOT hear discussed on those TV leaders' debates

 

 
1. Trident: The missiles are located in Scotland close to our biggest centre of population, even though we are opposed to having them here. They will cost up to £34bn to replace. The Scottish parliament has no say in this. Tony Blair needed Tory support to get the Trident replacement through parliament. Scotland's ruling party, the SNP, opposes Trident. Yet the BBC is so ignorant of this fact that it does not even list the nationalist view under the "What the Parties Think" section of its website Q & A on Trident

 

2. North Sea Oil. The role of North Sea Oil in Bailing out Britain has been greatly underplayed by successive governments over the last 30 years. They don't like to draw attention to it because, if they admitted oil revenues had helped the British economy even a little bit, that would mean that they could have had a proportionately greater impact on the smaller Scottish economy had they remained here. Businessmen who depend on a thriving North Sea - such as Sir Ian Wood - have expressed concern about the Treasury hiking up future taxes on oil companies in order to pay of the UK's massive debt. Far from Scotland being dependent on the UK because of the banking collapse, the UK actually needs us more.  Although the state likes us to believe oil has been running out almost from the moment we extracted the first barrel, Scotland still has significant reserves, of up to 25bn barrels. But getting them out will require investment.

 

3. Renewables.Scotland has the potential to become one of the world's leading centres of renewable energy. But to benefit properly, the government must invest. Energy policy is controlled by Westminster. But the debate in England is about nuclear power stations. If this was a Scottish debate, we would be asking - what is the government doing to ensure that Scottish manufacturers capitalise on their early lead re wave and tidal energy?  How are they going to fund an expansion in engineering skills, through better education and controlled emigration? What are they doing to improve the grid, in both the UK and the North Sea, to transport all this clean energy?  When will they stop Ofcom discriminating against renewable energy by charging extra for power generated away from population centres?

 

4. Curriculum for Excellence: Domestic issues such as education will feature in the leaders' debates - but only for England because it is devolved. While the leaders debate discusses English schools policy, it  will ignore Scottish education's is biggest overhaul in years: the introduction for a curriculum covering children aged 3 - 18. Already there are worries about the curriculum, particularly whether teachers are ready to implement it and whether it has received enough funding. On top of this, leading academics such as Lindsay Paterson, the professor of education at Edinburgh University, say it is a curriculum for ignorance which undermines specialist knowledge, and will do nothing to improve attainment. .

 

5 The economic benefits of independence and devo max. Both these options, along with Calman's proposals, have been examined in the SNP government's national conversation and laid out in the St Andrew's Day White Paper: Your Scotland, Your Voice. One of the devolution options, along with the powers to negotiate for independence, will be on the referendum ballot paper the SNP want to put before the Scottish people. All the debate about this issue has so far about process - eg how can the opposition parties be persuaded to support a poll and why is the SNP persisting with it. The real debate ought to be: How will the economic power to set taxes, for example, improve Scotland's growth rate, which has consistently underperformed as part of the UK union? And why are the other parties refusing to give Scots a say on their own future?

 

6. The Calman Commission  proposals for changing the way the Scottish parliament is funded. If these issues are debated at all, it will be in the context of their perceived effect on the numerically dominant English population. The Commission was limited in its scope. It would not look at independence and its purpose was strengthening the union rather than improving Scotland's lot. Several economists have said the powers proposed by Calman will result in Scotland's losing large amounts of income - this view is shared by Lord Forsyth, the unionist ex- secretary of state for Scotland. The Tories have not promised to implement it. Labour will do so with utmost speed. the Liberal Democrats position is actually closer to devo max.

 

7.Westminster balance of Power:What will a coalition of the SNP and Plaid demand as the price of supporting a minority government in Westminster? We will not know because they will not be there to tell us. BBC may regret this - the decision to exclude these parties may lead to them revising their support for the license fee - a signifcant policy shoft if they hold the balance of power.

 

8. London control of Broadcasting: Why is broadcasting not devolved to the Scottish parliament?  Why do we have to watch news bulletins on the BBC which talk about Tory plans to devolve more power to school head teachers in England, but completely ignore a similar proposal by the Scottish education secretary that very morning? Why is there no Scottish Digital Channel when most Scots want one?  Why is programme making in Scotland not in proportion to the amount of license fee we pay?  Why are our quality programmes examining important contemporary political and cultural issues in Scotland so badly underfunded compared to their English counterparts eg GMS v Today, Reporting Scotlad v Six O'Clock News. Newsnicht v Newsnight. Why is our broadcasting predominantly low and middle brow when the BBC in England produces highly intelligent broadcasting alongside more populist material?

 

9. Booze Why are Labour, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats blocking attempts to effectively tackle the greatest health/social problem of our age - alcohol abuse?  Like education this is a devolved issue, thoughit affects all UK nations, Scotland has lead the debate.

 

10. Powerless in Europe  How could Scotland benefit from its own voice in Europe? How does our debate on  European matters differ from that of England where the debate is skewed by Tory and UKIP hostility?

 

I could go on, but 10 is a good number. These debates are an affront to democracy. The fact that all three leaders have welcomed the opportunity to address Britain's people and claim it is an important turning point for public political participation only serves to highlight the unfairness of it all. It is agreed that these debates will be the centrepiece of the election campaign. I understand the SNP reluctance to seek legal intervention to ban something for which there is a demand. But it is the court that would make the decision. I cannot see how any sensible judge could not find in Scotland's favour. Mike Small at Bella Caledonia has also blogged about this.

Comments

[Billy Carlin]

These debates will be a farce the same as the political set up in the UK is a farce.

At present Scotland has three parliaments running it, the Scottish Parliament that runs all our everyday activities but needs the full powers and all of its own resources to be effective, The Westminster Parliament where the Scottish MPs do absolutely nothing for Scotland and only interfere in English matters, and the European Parliament.

There are too many politicians and too many parliaments. Scotland does not need politicians at Westminster any more than England needs another layer of politicians called an English parliament.

All of those from England complaining about Scotland and the Scottish MPs - well stop funding the unionist parties up here then you will solve your problems.

[Stephen Gash]

Maria

The Anglo-Scottish border was moved south in the Solway Firth because Cumbria County Council refused planning permission for huge offshore windfarms. Now Windfarms off the English coast are under the Scottish Government's control.

The first thing that happened was Scottish fisherman hoovering up shellfish beds previously protected when under English control.

The Welsh maritime border in the Irish Sea extends northward to Cumbria where it meets the Scottish maritime border. This is because there are plans to transfer Cumbria into Scotland just as Monmouthshire was transferred to Wales under Heath's lamentable PM-ship.

The same moves are being made about Berwick-Upon-Tweed. The River Tweed is now totally under Scottish control along with tributaries in England around Berwick.

Cornwall now has observer status in the British-Irish Council which does not even recognise England and indeed refused to to so.

North Wales and Cheshire councils now have a "working agreement". This is intended to move parts of Cheshire into Wales.

The deadliest enemies of the English are the British and the greatest threat to England is the so-called "United" Kingdom.

The English need to get out of it pretty smartly.

[Mark MacLachlan]

Gash, what an appropriate name.

[Stephen Gash]

Firstly, I am an English nationalist wanting English independence.

However, the North Sea oil argument irks me. Before the oil was discovered we were supposedly in a union where resources were shared. For example, Scotland's navy was 3 ships in 1707, whereas England's was 240 ships. Why would England buy ships from an erstwhile enemy, Scotland, any more than it would from France? Scotland's shipbuilding industry would not have existed without the union. This is one of many examples.

However, when oil is found, all of a sudden "it's oor oil".

Well they were our banks that the Scots f***ed up and a Scots-led socialist government that f***ed up the English economy.

So please vote SNP and in God's name go away in a curiously rhythmic fashion. Oh, and make sure you take your part of the national debt with you.

For the record, you didn't discover penicillin, invent radar, television, telephone or tarmac.

Just as Brown showed today in the Chilcott enquiry, Scots are congental credit-claimers, but pathological buckpassers.

Scot - a four-letter word meaning overrated.

[L.L.]

Those who believe in the Ancient Nation of Scotland also believe in the Ancient Nation of England.

[Donald McDonald]

To David Rikard and his English perspective.

Thanks for taking the time to differentiate between the farcical unionists of north britain labour who see fit to tell you English folks how you should run your lives and the SNP whom wish to be good neighbours of England, have an open border but manage our own countries as France and Italy do.

Did you know that you are not permitted to choose English as your nationality in your loal authority's voter registration for 2010.

Imagine that, a country of 50 000 000 people and you are not allowed to state your English.

I do appreciate the frustration of the union is not all one way.

Donnie McDonald

[britologywatch]

Trident: I imagine this will be discussed in the debate on 'international' affairs, as it relates to so-called 'national' security. I agree it definitely should be discussed, though, given the concerns about safety and the location near to Scottish population centres.

By contrast, though, Scotland should also be brought into the debate on nuclear power. When the British government's plans for ten new nuclear power stations were announced at the end of last year, no one in the supposedly 'anglocentric' media bothered to point out that none of the proposed plants were located in Scotland, despite its considerably lesser population density. That's because Scotland has control over its own planning, whereas a distinctly authoritarian planning law, which the media discussed as being 'British', allows the government to ride rough-shod over environmental and safety concerns in England and, in the area of power generation, Wales. Can't see that being discussed in the debates.

School curriculum: the Scottish one should form no part of any of the debates, not even the one broadcast only in Scotland, as none of the Scottish-elected Westminster MPs will be empowered to do anything about it, though they will be able to meddle in the English education system (SNP honorably excepted). So the debate should and will be limited to England; and it should, but won't, be explicitly flagged up as being limited to England.

Devolution debate: this is somewhat Scotland-centric in your post, might I point out. However, there's also a vigorous debate going on in Wales, and devolution for / in England should also be included. Clearly, the main reason for excluding the SNP and Plaid is not so much to suppress the debates in Scotland and Wales respectively but to keep down the spectre of England, which is Banquo's ghost at the devolution feast. That's the reason why the parties will also do their utmost to suppress any mention of England even when discussing exclusively English policies.

Westminster balance of power: yes, you're absolutely right. That could also include the N. Irish parties. It's a total disgrace that all the people in the UK will not hear about what the parties in the 'nations', as the establishment likes to refer to the devolved nations, would do in a hung parliament.

London control over broadcasting: hear, hear! How about some English-focused news and current affairs programmes, for a change, like the ones that already exist for Scotland and Wales?

Powerless in Europe: well, the leaders probably will have to discuss Europe in the debate on international affairs. From the English perspective, this is more about being denied a referendum on Lisbon / EU membership, which all the parties stand accused of. So how about UKIP being invited, too, alongside - at least - the SNP, Plaid, Sinn Fein and the DUP?

Re Toque's comment: my post is at http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/party-leaders%e2%80%99-debates-any-chance-of-a-reference-to-england/. Shameless self-promotion!

[DougtheDug]

Joan, the point to remember about these debates is that they are a manifestation of the philosophy that England is Britain is England.

They take the rules of political impartiality for England which has three parties defined by OFCOM as major parties and apply these rules across the UK when Scotland, Wales and NI each have four OFCOM defined major parties.

The debates will also completely ignore devolution and will discuss policies on domestic matters without acknowledging that these are specific only to England.

A large part of the reason that they want neither Salmond from the SNP nor Jones from PC on the platform is that their presence will mean that they have to acknowledge that Britain is not a nation but a collection of nations and that may damage the idea Britishness that all of the three parties promote heavily. Without Salmond or Jones the fiction that it is a series of British debates, with British parties about the governance of Britain and that Britain is a unified nation can continue.

None of the ten items for discussion you list fit in with that British theme and several of them are dangerously nationalistic so you'll hear them debated by Brown, Cameron and Clegg when the Devil drives a snowplough to work.

[joanmcalpine]

Torque totally agree. SNP MPs refuse on point of princple to vote on English domestic matters...so should Brown or any Scottish MP. It is very unfair.

As for Newsnight England, why not? Although I thought that generally the programme showed english domestic issues in the final 20 minute slot - like the stuff on the stinking Thames last night, which I saw because you can only watch the UK version live on the internet.

[Toque]

David Rickard @ Britology Watch has also blogged bout this, from an English perspective.

If you stop and think about it for a moment you might see that the real unfairness lies in the fact that one of the contestants is a Scottish MP, elected by Scottish constituents, informing us English what he intends to do with our schools and health service - and do you think he will mention the word 'England' when he's doing this?

There should be a separate series of TV debates for England alone. Just as there will be a BBC debate for Scotland alone, addressing Scottish issues.

We English have to put up with three toss-pots prattling on about the 'British NHS' and 'British schools' when they know full well that they should be talking about the English NHS and English schools because they have no direct say over devolved issues like those.

Personally I'd love it if Alex Salmond took part, if only to force the three little Britishers to concede that they had no mandate for 'Britain' for vast tracts of their manifestos.

So this Englishman for one welcomes Salmond.

[Home Rule for England]

The BBC shows a Scottish Newsnight at 11pm. In England we have to put up with a continuation of the British Newsnight. Why can't England have an English Newsnight at 11pm?

[Wardog]

Excellent work Joan, you are so right - it's ridiculous.

The Greens and SNP would do well to use this as a key issues in the coming months by taking out full adverts / Billboards with this list on them.

[Doug Daniel]

It's ridiculous. Not only are we denied the power to decide these issues for ourselves, but we're even denied the ability to debate them. You mention that domestic issues will be discussed, but only for England. Education and health are likely to be big issues at the election, so when Tweedledum, Tweedledee and Tweedlewho start spouting off about what they'll do for our schools and hospitals, they will be misleading the Scottish public.

In a way, I'm almost glad these debates have come about, because they've highlighted just how ridiculous the current set up is, and how England-centric the media is. If we're not allowed to decide upon things like Trident and energy policy for ourselves, we should at least be able to have them included in the debate so we can see which party has the best policy. But the fact is by excluding the SNP, they can sidestep these sort of issues, and avoid having to make commitments.

The biggest miscarriage of justice, however, is that Calman/devo max/independence should probably be the main issue for the Scottish electorate, and it will be completely ignored. It won't be brought up at the debates, and I suspect these debates will frame the overall debate of the election. Anything not included in these programmes will be considered unimportant, which means completely ignoring pretty much every Scottish issue.

They'd better watch, though - it's little things like this that annoy people and make them say "right, well if you're not going to pay attention to my concerns, I'll vote for the only party that does". Could the result be 20 SNP MPs after all?

[Maria]

But all the oil and gas is not Scottish - and Scotland was benefitting from higher spending years before the Barnett Formula.

I would certainly like the Continental Shelf Act of the 1960s, which placed formerly English waters in a Scottish "sector", looked at.

Your post is one-eyed and incredibly biased.

I'd be surprised if you let this through your comment moderation - or have fair answers to give if you do.