Welcome to the Sign for Scotland blog!
We're a group for those within Scotland's 'SIGNING' Community who believe in Independence and want to fully participate in the referendum debate. We are open to everyone who is interested in promoting BSL, from those who use the language as their primary form of communication, to learners and well-wishers.
On Saturday, the 3rd of May Sign for Scotland was at the opening of the Yes Moray shop on Elgin High Street!
There were a lot of people present and a great deal of excitement from passersby. To mark the opening were Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, a senior member of Yes Scotland and Women for Independence who previously helped us with our video 'I'm voting Yes' and Richard Lochhead MSP, who is the Scottish Cabinet for Rural Affairs and the Environment.
Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh with 'Wee Mo'
The shop is the first in Moray and should act as a hub for support for the Yes campaign until the day of the vote. There will be leaflets and different items available, making it useful for both Yes supporters and those who are undecided. You can see for yourself what the shop looks like from our video!
We are certain that the Yes shops around Scotland will have a big impact on the campaign. They are bright, welcoming and full of information. Not every has access to the internet or the time to search for answers, so shops like these help to reach a few more people who otherwise may have felt excluded. This referendum is for everyone who lives in Scotland and they help to secure a few more votes then they will be very worthwhile.
Securing a Yes vote will take a lot of time and effort, but we have more committed activists than the other side. Our aim is to create a more democratic Scotland. We believe that the ability to make decisions for ourselves will result in a fairer, more prosperous society. Days like the 3rd of May reminded us that we are not alone in this campaign and that if we keep up the hard work we will be able to take that first step towards a better Scotland.
I was delighted to see BDA Scotland hosting a debate in Edinburgh earlier this year. These types of events are fantastic because it allows as many people as possible to take part in the referendum. Sign for Scotland had a few friends in the audience that day who all said that they had enjoyed themselves and I managed to watch a bit of the live stream of the event. It was a great contribution and one we wholeheartedly thank the BDA for.
So earlier this week I was excited to read the article that BDA Scotland had written about the event. The article focused on 5 'key' questions:
Will the BSL Bill slip down the priority order with the Scottish Parliament if Scotland becomes independent?
Will current provision provided to Deaf people in the UK be continued in an independent Scotland? Example DSA (Disabled Students Award): ATW (Access to Work) and BBC?
Some policy areas that affect Deaf people such as education and health have already been devolved to Scotland. How will independence affect Deaf people in a way that is meaningful to raise Deaf awareness and improve wellbeing of Deaf people?
With recent events in Ukraine which went independent from Russia - are we stronger together or weaker?
SNP want Scotland to become an independent state but keep the pound. It shows they could not run on their own and rely on Westminster for economy and stability.
This blog is going to look at each question in turn, provide some responses and then pose 5 more which are key questions for me.
Importance of BSL
The first question is specifically in regards to the BSL Bill that is going through the Scottish Parliament. I personally don't see why independence would affect the passing of this bill. We know that there are numerous MSPs who take an interest in Sign Language, including Humza Yousaf (minister for external affairs and international development), John Finnie (independent MSP) and Nicola Sturgeon (Deputy First Minister), each of whom were kind enough to feature in our 'I'm voting Yes' video earlier this year.
The further point I would make is in regards to the treatment of languages by Westminster and Holyrood. At Westminster, every oath of allegiance must be made in English with only Welsh, Gaelic and Cornish allowed in the form of additions. Compare this to the Scottish Parliament, where in this term alone we have seen swearing in ceremonies in English, Gaelic, Doric, Urdu, Italian and French with no restrictions made.
Disabled Students Award, Access to Work and the BBC
The White Paper produced by the Scottish Government (a BSL version of which can be viewed here) looks at the different options available to an independent Scotland in regards to social welfare. We don't need to accept unfair policies such as the bedroom tax because social welfare expenditure is a much lower percentage of our income than it is in the rest of the UK.
The BBC currently shows programmes in over 100 countries, with over 75 nations tuning in at the same time to watch the Dr Who 50th anniversary special. To suggest that Scotland cannot afford the £20 million that Irish television pays for most BBC channels when we currently hand over £193 million every year (which will instead be added to a Scottish broadcaster) is disingenuous at best. The only reason we wouldn't have BBC channels is if we didn't want them.
How will independence affect Deaf people in a way that is meaningful to
raise Deaf awareness and improve wellbeing of Deaf people?
The best way to respond to this question is to look at the examples of our neighbours. The following is from a report by The Aspiring Polyglot which analysed Deaf Communities throughout history:
Deaf Swedes During the Late 20th and Early 21st Century
More recently, with a progressive, socialist government committed to a
quality lifestyle for all its citizens, Deaf Swedes were able to enjoy a
superior lifestyle (Wallin, 194, 1996). Schools for the deaf were
noted for their exceptional success in the instruction of deaf children.
These positive outcomes could be attributed to the bilingual
philosophy that had been adopted by the Swedish deaf educational system.
A key part of this program involved members of the Deaf community, who
taught Swedish sign language to families with deaf children (Andersson,
1994; Mahsie, 1995).
As soon as families with a deaf child were
identified, they were referred to local Deaf-run organizations for
support and were paired with Deaf adults who introduced them to Deaf
culture’s ready-made solutions for effective living. In this sense,
Deaf adults served as linguistic and cultural role models by providing
sign language and cultural lessons.
By being exposed to successful Deaf
adults and the readily available solutions to problems of daily living
from the Deaf community, the period of grief and frustrations associated
with having a deaf baby was remarkably brief for these Swedish parents.
For example, with an early start in learning sign language for both
parents and deaf children, communication difficulties were minimized,
paving the way for a healthy family relationship right from the
beginning.
For Deaf adults in Sweden, government-supported interpreting
services were readily available, making it possible for them to
participate fully in all aspects of society, including the workforce,
social and cultural arenas, and social service (Wallin, 1994). The Aspiring Polyglot
Independence allows us to look at the example of our neighbours and to impliment policies tailored to our circumstances. We can take the best legislation not just from Westminster, but from all over Europe and the World and try new ideas of our own. Independence isn't a solution but the means to solutions. It gives options that voting 'no' just can't offer.
With recent events in Ukraine which went independent from Russia - are we stronger together or weaker?
The UK, despite it's vast military spending, has not been able to do anything to influence the situation in Crimea or Eastern Ukraine. In terms of influence and power, the UK is well below the United States, China, Russia and India and is struggling to keep up with Brazil, South Africa, France, Germany, Japan and Nigeria.
Westminster has held a veto in the UN security council yet has not used this in isolation for over 40 years, rending its role pointless.
Independence means that we can tailor our defence, recruit more personnel, and stop uranium weapons testing in our soil. These are the features that define a strong country.
SNP want Scotland to become an independent state but keep the pound. It
shows they could not run on their own and rely on Westminster for
economy and stability.
Let's look at everything that wrong with this statement:
1 - Independence allows us to elect whoever we want. This means that no party is guaranteed to be in power (something that cannot be said about Westminster) and thus if we don't vote SNP in 2016 then we won't get SNP policies. A Yes vote is backed by many parties who want Scotland to have its own, independent currency, including the Scottish Green Party, the Scottish Socialist Party and the Scottish Democratic Alliance.
3 - 'It shows that they could not run on their own and rely on Westminster for economy and stability' is simply nonsense. It shows that they believe this is the best option (not only for Scotland, but for the rest of the UK whose financial stability is in our interests to maintain). Indeed the White Paper lists three other options which are more than capable of working.
And now for my top 5 key questions:
1 -20% of kids in Scotland grow up in poverty. This is more than double the rate of independent Denmark and independent Norway. Is this unnecessary poverty a price worth paying for keeping Westminster in power?
2 - Scotland is an energy exporter with vast resources, yet 1 in 3 households in our country suffers from fuel poverty. Why is it that under Westminster our winter death rate is twice that of independent Sweden and independent Norway even though they suffer harsher climates?
3 - Why has Scotland been involved in 137 separate conflicts in 171 different countries around the world. What guarantee do we have that Westminster won't drag us into more illegal wars in the future?
4 - Westminster has a history of lying to the people of Scotland, from luring us into illegal wars, to the infamous McCrone report which was hidden from the Scottish people for decades. What guarantee do we have that Westminster won't continue to lie to us in the future?
5 - Why has none of the over 50 countries in the world to have gained their independence from Westminster ever went back to London rule?
The Scottish BDA do a great deal of excellent work and I hope that they continue to improve access to the referendum debate for BSL users. I also hope that they will look at broadening the range of their key issues in future.
If you have 5 key questions, then tell us in the comments below. Our next scheduled blog will be on Sunday, the 11th May. In the meantime, you can watch our latest 'Why Yes' video!
So much has happened in the last few days that we had to make an extra entry into our monthly 'not in the news' series. In this edition, we are only looking at the stories
which have taken place from Saturday, the 26th of April to Tuesday, 29th.
Bum notes?
A prime example of why Scotland needs to represent itself internationally came on Sunday, the 27th of April. Despite assurances from UK environment secretary Owen Paterson MP to highlight concerns held by the Scottish Parliament regarding Genetically Modified crops at a European Union meeting on the topic, the minister failed to do so.
Mr Paterson said: "...we [self and Scottish Environment minister Paul Wheelhouse] agreed the speaking note and I have to confess I think I read the preceding one."
More bum note incompetency from people who don't want us representing ourselves. [As a side note, the position of the UK Government over GM Crops is different from that of the Scottish Government, making this 'error' even more significant].
Dramatisation
Don't watch that, watch this!
First Minister Alex Salmond made a speech in Bruges, Belgium on Monday, the 28th of April. He spoke of the historic connections between the city and Scotland, of duel nationalities and the positive contribution that new Scots have made to our nation, the democratic deficit that we face and the desire to make a positive contribution to Europe and the world at large.
"Scotland will ask for continued membership on the basis
of “continuity of effect”, and at no detriment to other members.
So there need be no
reopening of the EU budget agreed last year to 2020. Scotland would take
responsibility for its share of UK contributions and receipts – which
means that we would still be a net contributor to the EU. We would
remain within the Common Travel Area of the British Isles, as we are at
present. And as a senior UK Government minister acknowledged to the
Guardian newspaper last month, “of course” we will continue to share a currency with the rest of the UK.
We propose a practical,
common sense approach to membership, which means that there is no
detriment – none whatsoever – to any other member of the European Union
as a result of Scotland’s continuing membership." First Minister Alex Salmond, 28th of April
Most people will not have come across this speach because another story 'broke' at the same time. "Fury as 'insensitive' Salmond praises Putin for restoring Russian pride in itself" was the headline in the Mail online. This came from an interview by GQ Magazine from the 14th of March (over six weeks earlier and before the situation in Crimea - or put another way before we wrote the Not in the News - March edition). But let's see the vile, insensitive quote:
"Obviously, I don't approve of a range of Russian actions, but I
think Putin's more effective than the press he gets, I would have
thought, and you can see why he carries support in Russia.
He's restored a substantial part of Russian pride and that must be a
good thing. There are aspects of Russian constitutionality and the
intermesh with business and politics that are obviously difficult to
admire. Russians are fantastic people, incidentally; they are lovely
people." Alex Salmond, 14th of March
Of course, we're talking about the Scottish Media, so these facts aren't in the news now.
Donzilla!
Another secret radiation leak story came to light, this time in Aberdeen harbour.
"An investigation by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) found one “gross” breach and several “major” breaches of the firm’s operating conditions.
However,
the public was never told about the leak, which continued unchecked
from November 2011 until April 2012, and it also appears that the
Scottish Government was not informed either." Scottish Express, 26th of April
On Tuesday, the BBC announced that they had been members of anti-independence group the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) for 'at least 10 years'. But investigative work from BBC reporter James Cook found that 'at least 10 years' was is reality at least 34.
The BBC hand over £22,191.94 of our money per year for membership of the officially anti-independence CBI however no reason has been forthcoming as to why the UK state broadcaster is a member at all. The National Union of Journalists expressed their concerns by stating that their impartiality "is entirely undermined by the BBC retaining a link with an organisation allied to one side of the independence debate." Even when the CBI announced that their members were backing a no vote, the British Broadcasting Corporation stood side by side with their Big Business Chums. We can only speculate as to why.
(A little side note: although £22,191.94 looks like a lot of money, it is small change compared to the £193 million per year the BBC stands to lose with a Yes vote!).
Debating courage
Another day, another debate that the 'no' campaign doesn't want to take part in. The Electoral Reform Society Scotland were asked to chair an event between representatives of Yes Scotland and Better Together at a public meeting in Glasgow. A neutral mediator and a public forum is surely fair, right?
Well no, the no campaign didn't want to take part. They stated that because Yes Scotland had made the arrangements that they wouldn't be involved. We're certain that this is a sincere excuse and that an event that was mutually organised by both sides would meet their approval...right...right?
"Questions from the public? And we have to answer them? That's not fair!" No campaign objection (probably)
Join us again for a full 'not in the paper' review in May!
Drew
