Not in the paper review - April

Welcome to the fourth of our monthly series looking back at the stories which the main stream media in Scotland didn't offer much attention to, and comparing them to those that hit the front pages.

Letter from America

There were two speeches made in the United States of America in early April: one was by a democratically elected politician who was acting in his capacity as head of a national parliament, the other by an unelected lord who has as much significance and relevance to Scotland as a turnip. Which do you believe received the most coverage from STV, the BBC and the papers?

Passing Wind

Claims from Westminster that energy prices in an independent Scotland would skyrocket were quickly and decisively rubbished this month. In the words of Professor Peter Strachan, Professor of Energy Policy at Robert Gordon's University:

"...under no scenario can I see in an independent Scotland electricity bills increasing. In an independent Scotland, even with an integrated electricity market, Scotland would be able to sell its electricity at commercial rates. What would also be very helpful for Scotland's renewable energy industry as well is that an independent Scotland would also be able to offer discretionary spend, so that you could see a great expansion, for example, of offshore wind.

At the moment, what we are seeing with the coalition government is the offshore renewable industry effectively being strangled at birth..." BBC Radio Scotland interview - 9th April 2014

Penny wise, pound daft

Attacks on First Minister Alex Salmond from the Telegraph aren't unusual, but this month saw a story which was stranger than most. It's 'reveal' was to say that the First Minister and his wife stayed in a nice hotel in Chicago at a cost of £750 per night for 4 nights whilst arranging multi-million pound trade deals for Scotland.

 

As a comparison, the same newspaper back in June last year attempted to justify a £100,000 refurbishment of the toilets within the House of Lords. Could they be experiencing the Goldilocks Axiom!

 
Two faces on every politician, three eyes on every fish

Scotland's energy minister, Fergus Ewing, was on the receiving end of intimidation in April over the controversial nuclear power station in Hinkly Point, Somerset. If the Scottish Government were to get involved in the EU investigation into the nuclear power station, it would be viewed as a 'hostile act' by Westminster.

  

It is great to know that the union is a partnership of equals and that the UK Government have absolutely nothing to hide!

Oh yeah, there was someone who once raided pension funds talking about pensions...

Are they even pretending to be serious anymore?
We don't need to say much about the Daily Express on Tuesday, the 22nd of April.

Scottish Daily Express - the edited voice of a new Scotland

Yes, both of these newspapers were published on the same day, by the same organisation. The one of the left was for most of the UK, highlighting the deteriorating condition of pensions following decades of mismanagement under the UK, and the other was for Scotland, saying how much safer our pensions would be under that same UK system they were lambasting everywhere else. Another case of the Goldilocks Axiom, or perhaps they require a reminder about the principles of journalism.

 
Public meeting (but we won't tell you where!)

Labour Party Leader Ed Miliband hosted a 'public' meeting in Motherwell in April. If you didn't know about this before the event then you weren't alone.

"...we can’t find a single advance reference to the venue we think that may be a rather loose interpretation of the word “public”." Rev Stuart Campbell - Wings over Scotland

"Residents of a row of neat housing association homes overlooking the community hall that hosted Mr Miliband in this town southeast of Glasgow were angry only to have learnt about the event when a satellite broadcast van turned up." FT, Friday, April 25th

The Confederation of British Flip-Floppers!

The Daily Express managed to take our comedy award for the month (see above), but they were pushed hard for the title by the CBI and the BBC.

 

The story began with the CBI (a group consisting of around 70 businesses and other organisations in Scotland) declaring it's support for a 'no' vote in the referendum. This triggered an outflow of members who wished to remain neutral in the debate. This included a number of universities, Scottish Enterprise and STV (the BBC eventually stated that they would remain in the 'no' campaign body until a few weeks before the vote, with the intention of rejoining immediately afterwords).

"Since announcing its backing for the No campaign, the CBI has been hit with a mass exodus of organisations in Scotland.  Broadcaster STV resigned immediately, claiming that the decision had compromised its own neutrality in the independence referendum." Newsnet Scotland, 26th of April

Just one week later, the CBI announced that they were withdrawing their application to the Electoral Commission to be officially part of the 'no' campaign.

“When the Sunday Herald contacted CBI Scotland director Iain McMillan, he directed all enquiries on the matter to the UK press office. Asked if the decision to register with the Electoral Commission was made after discussions with Scottish or UK members, a CBI spokesman said: “We have talked to members regularly in Scotland and across the UK at CBI events and via our system of committees and councils.”, He added that the “final position” was signed off by CBI Scotland’s council – its membership decision-making body.” Herald Scotland, 20th of April

"Following a review by the CBI board and in the light of legal advice from its lawyers and Queen’s Counsel it has emerged that the application should not have been made: it did not have approval under the CBI’s normal corporate governance procedures and was not signed by an authorised signatory." CBI Press Release, 25th of April

In just 1 week, the Confederation of Business Industry has gone from claiming it had consulted its members to ascertain their views (which they didn't) and that it's council in Scotland had signed off on the decision to join the 'no' campaign, to saying that the application was made by a 'unauthorised signatory'. It seems these people don't understand how to run an organisation!

 

But even more pressure may fall upon the BBC. The list of 25 questions from The Alderman Wotisname Memorial Playing Fields cover the vast majority of these, including 'why is the BBC a member of the CBI?', 'where does the BBC publish and publicise its membership of the CBI?', and 'during the time the BBC was aware of the CBI’s stance, how many times did it quote the CBI on the issue of independence?'

And perhaps most important of all, 'how will the BBC rebuild trust in its integrity?'

Join us again for our next 'not in the paper' review in May!
Drew

If you like this blog, then please consider visiting our other sites:
Facebook - Sign for Scotland
YouTube - Sign4Scotland
Twitter - Sign4Scotland

P.S We have added an extension to this article called 'Second Not in the News for April', which you can read here.

The three poverties of Westminster

Westminster is presiding over an age of poverty in Scotland; a poverty of wealth, a poverty of ideas, and a poverty of justice. This blog will look at each in turn, and show that the only credible solution to these issues is to vote Yes to independence.

 

Poverty of Wealth

This is the form of poverty that most people will be familiar with. It is the struggle to heat a home or feed a family. It is the uncertainty of when the next wage slip will arrive. It is the fear that the social security safety net will be taken away to attract the all important southeast vote.

 

According to Unisef, 19.8% of people in Britain live in poverty compared to 4.3% in Finland, 3.9% in Norway and just 2.6% in Sweden. 14% of kids in this situation don't own a warm winter coat and 1 in 9 children in Scotland are growing up in severe poverty. The figures from The Breadline Britain Poverty and Social Exclusion report of 2013 suggests that even these numbers are understatements, with their research finding that 29% of people in Scotland are unable to afford 3 or more basic essentials.

  

Frighteningly, these numbers aren't that different from 1983. And it is unlikely that they will change for us in Scotland as the vast majority of new private sector jobs are being created in London, which is increasely becoming the primary consideration of UK Governments.

 

 

Westminster has and is failing the people of Scotland.

 

Poverty of Ideas

The only way to reduce or eradicate poverty is through ideas. We can't keep doing the same things and hoping for a different outcome. However, this cannot change under the current setup as there is an inbuilt protection of the status quo at Westminster. Only two parties can ever lead the government and they are taking increasingly similar approaches towards nearly every issue.

"Rather than opposing the Tory-led government, Ed Balls is picking a fight with trade unions. Instead of focusing energies on stopping cuts to welfare, pensions, pay and public services, the shadow chancellor is telling us to learn to live with it." Counterfire, 14th of January 2012

Instead of cutting wasteful expenditure which take wealth away from Scotland, the austerity cuts are to continue.

"Scotland cannot be the the only 'something for nothing' country in the world." Johann Lamont, Labour Party, 25th of September 2012

"...Johann Lamont, derided nationalist opposition to Trident, the Iraq war and the bedroom tax as simply "wee things" offered by independence." Guardian, 30th January 2014

Even with 'further devolution', Scotland will be unable to defend itself from decisions made by Westminster:

"Scotland will not be getting more money, it will simply be accountable for raising more of its money." Johann Lamont, 13th of April 2014

With budgets and our powers controlled by Westminster, and with every incentive to make Holyrood as weak as possible, we are left in a position where we must follow their policies even if we don't want them. The only way to change this is to vote Yes.

 

In Scotland we have a proportional system. This encourages ideas and diversity. It ensures that no party is guaranteed to return to power but instead has to continually earn votes. Those that fail disappear. It also allows people to vote positively for what they actually want, instead of negatively against what they fear. All Holyrood is lacking are the powers of a normal parliament.

 

Poverty of Justice

We have written at length, repeatedly, about the various forms of corruption that has taken over the Westminster system. We have more unelected than elected representatives, we have a host of criminal activities taking place within the City of London, and we have people voting on legislation who have an outside commercial interest in its outcome. We have a poverty of justice.

 

It doesn't need to be this way. Because there is no risk of oblivion for Labour or the Conservatives, there is no long term consequence for immoral behaviour. They don't need to be competent, wise or principled because the best way to be elected in a rigid two-party system is to make the other side appear unelectable. Campaigns are arranged through the media and not at public meetings. Voters are told what they should believe, instead of engaging with the process directly.
 
With no written constitution to protect us, no ability for other parties to apply pressure and no incentive to reform from within, the rampant corruption within Westminster is free to continue.

 

If we want to end financial poverty, then we need to start by ending the idea and justice poverties from Westminster. We need to look at the democratic forms of government that our neighbours enjoy and to build upon it. We need to ensure that every vote matters and that there is no guarantee of power to those who attended the right schools and knew the right people.

 

 

We need a competition of ideas and ideals to ensure that our interests and values are served and we need to ensure that we have the option to cut the wasteful expenditure that does our economy no good before plunging even more of our fellow citizens into poverty.

 

Independence means that we make decisions for ourselves, and guarantees our children as many opportunities and choices as possible. And it is the only credible way to end the three poverties of Westminster.

Drew
 

If you like this blog, then please consider visiting our other sites:
Facebook - Sign for Scotland
YouTube - Sign4Scotland
Twitter - Sign4Scotland

Rather than opposing the Tory-led government, Ed Balls is picking a fight with trade unions. Instead of focusing energies on stopping cuts to welfare, pensions, pay and public services, the shadow chancellor is telling us to learn to live with it. - See more at: http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/articles/opinion/15427-ed-balls-labour-will-keep-all-these-cuts#sthash.qxRy11pI.dpuf

Rather than opposing the Tory-led government, Ed Balls is picking a fight with trade unions. Instead of focusing energies on stopping cuts to welfare, pensions, pay and public services, the shadow chancellor is telling us to learn to live with it. - See more at: http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/articles/opinion/15427-ed-balls-labour-will-keep-all-these-cuts#sthash.qxRy11pI.dpuf

Rather than opposing the Tory-led government, Ed Balls is picking a fight with trade unions. Instead of focusing energies on stopping cuts to welfare, pensions, pay and public services, the shadow chancellor is telling us to learn to live with it. - See more at: http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/articles/opinion/15427-ed-balls-labour-will-keep-all-these-cuts#sthash.qxRy11pI.dpuf

Making a connection

Energy is extremely important. Every nation needs to have enough power to keep the lights on and drive industrial processes. This can either be created within the country itself, or by purchasing from neighbouring nations. Any government anywhere in the world that can't keep the lights on tends to be out of office pretty quickly.

So how does this connect with the Scottish referendum debate? Quite a bit actually, as we have the potential to have cheap, safe and unexhaustible energy whilst generating fantastic revenues from its export.

 

Scotland is blessed with plentiful resources. This includes almost 60% of EU oil reserves and around a third of the EU's hydrocarbon production. There are vast amounts of oil left in the North Sea (enough to last 100 years) and potentially even more on Scotland's west coast. But, just like the uranium required for nuclear power stations, these will not last forever, and there are arguments that some of the fossil fuel remaining shouldn't be disturbed at all.

 

Fortunately we have also been blessed with vast renewable energy potential. This will not run out and can power a nation safely and consistently, just as our friends in Denmark are doing right now. We host 25% of Europe's offshore wind and tidal potential, as well as 10% of wave potential. The Penland Firth on it's own could power half of Scotland, and this is with today's technology. Advancements could push this even further.

 

The reason why this is important to the independence debate is because this potential is not being realised by Westminster. Indeed they are actively hurting renewable energy whilst chasing after a more expensive alternative.

 

Scottish generators account for around 12% of the capacity connected to Britain's high-voltage electricity network but pay around 35% of the charges. Orkney and Shetland alone are likely to see an annual connection charge fee of £107 million by 2020, a massive increase from the already excessively high £56 million charged in 2011. By comparison, a connection subsidy of £2 million would be paid if this same project were built in the south west of England. This is because connection charges to the national grid are based on distance to population centres, which covers-up subsides to nuclear energy projects and artificially inflates the cost of renewable energy.

 

With independence we can get rid of this inherently unfair and unproductive system.

 

The choice facing Scotland's energy future becomes even clearer when we look at Westminster's proposals for the future. They are already committed to doubling energy prices:

"But the Government has come under fire for guaranteeing to pay £92.50 per megawatt hour of electricity produced - a so-called "strike price" double the current market rate." Sky News, October 2013

This committment to new nuclear power stations comes despite the revelation of a £100 million pound, 120 year clean up cost to existing facilities. It also defies the economic case for renewable energy including the significant number of jobs it offers to local communities. Having a combination of on and off-shore wind farms, hydroelectric plants, solar panels and geothermal energy, will provide reliable, safe, and affordable power not just for ourselves, but for every generation that follows. The potential to end fuel poverty in Scotland forever, as well as contributing to the African Dream, is too much for me to ignore.

 

A Yes vote puts Scotland's energy future into our hands. It will offer better prices for consumers, more competitiveness for our industries, and irradicate fuel poverty from our nation forever. It offers a reliable, consistent source of export revenue, employment for our island and remote communities and can contribute towards the aspirations of developing nations.

 

Westminster is guaranteeing higher prices, the continuation of unfair connection charges and even more dependence on the depleting global supply of uranium. The only way to have an energy policy that matches the interests of Scotland is to have the powers of independence.

Drew
 

If you like this blog, then please consider visiting our other sites:

Facebook - Sign for Scotland
YouTube - Sign4Scotland
Twitter - Sign4Scotland