Jeremy Corbyn and Mhairi Black 211

There are very few people who support Irish re-unification but oppose Scottish Independence. I do not know of any. I have always, from my knowledge of Jeremy Corbyn and his general political philosophy and way of thinking, and that of many of his close associates, believed him to be sympathetic to Scottish Independence.

I do not claim to know Jeremy well. I have shared a Stop the War platform with him a few times and exchanged a few emails. He assisted this blog by asking some parliamentary questions I suggested on Fox/Werritty, and he successfully intervened with then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith at my request to stop the imminent deportation of an Uzbek asylum seeker.

His behaviour in all of those contacts was absolutely admirable. I like and admire Jeremy, something which is not popular with my fellow Scottish nationalists. One thing Jeremy Corbyn could never be described as is a unionist – he comes from a totally different political place. I also sympathise with his extremely difficult position in wrenching the Labour Party away from the Blairites and the fact that he cannot fight every battle simultaneously.

I therefore have no doubt Mhairi Black is telling the truth today, that Corbyn revealed to her that he privately supports Scottish Independence. I am sure that, like me, Corbyn sees it as part of the decolonisation process of burying the British Empire.

I also have enormous admiration for Mhairi, with whom I too have shared a platform several times. Like many, I am impatient for Mhairi’s leadership of the SNP to begin. But I am not quite certain it was wise to reveal Jeremy’s confidential comment. It is unlikely the current state of the Labour Party will leave him able at this moment to take a more forward stance on Scottish Independence.

I do understand and sympathise with Mhairi’s impatience. But as with Independence so with Trident. I have no doubt that Jeremy Corbyn is 100% and fundamentally opposed to nuclear weapons, and is an unilateralist. I also have no doubt that in power he would act on that. But at this stage on his road to power he cannot take that stance in the struggle for control of the Labour Party. I do not regard this as “selling out”, I regard it as realpolitik and I am prepared to withhold judgement for a few more years as his plan is worked through.

There is an important element that should not be missed. The Blairite leadership of Scottish Labour is increasingly unrepresentative of Labour Party grassroots in Scotland. There has not – despite the constant media propaganda – been a great surge in Tory support in Scotland, which has an iron ceiling around 25%.

What has happened is that many Labour Party supporters who switched to the SNP around the 2014 referendum, have gone back to Labour. But they still retain their belief in Independence; opinion polls regularly show that a quarter or more of Scottish Labour Party voters support Independence, and that support is steadily growing.

I know personally several 2015 SNP voters who have reverted to Labour, including members of my own family. In every case the reason is the same. They like Jeremy Corbyn and, while they would prioritise Scottish Independence, the SNP leadership has been downplaying Independence. Sturgeon very openly campaigned at the Westminster election on the basis that she wanted unionists to feel comfortable voting SNP, and that a vote for the SNP was specifically not a vote for Independence. Some people took her at her word and decided they might as well vote Labour, if a vote for the SNP was not a vote for Independence anyway.

The upshot of all this is that I believe we are seeing a historical trend against hardline unionism among Scottish Labour members and voters. I strongly believe Jeremy Corbyn is not an enemy of the Scottish people in the way that the Tories and the Blairites are. It is healthy that Mhairi has provided us with an opportunity to get this discussion a bit more open; breaking down the tribalism of Scottish politics is a long haul.

I should add that my personal view is that we should stick with the SNP. We are stuck in what I would call the Sturgeon Paradox; falling support for the SNP has hit the confidence of the leadership to go for Independence, but the lack of campaigning for Independence leads to falling support for the SNP. My view remains that getting behind the SNP, and strongly urging the MSP’s to call Indyref2, is a much better route to Independence at this moment than working through the Labour Party or through fringe parties.

I was astounded at the size of the march in Glasgow on Saturday – the biggest pro-Independence demonstration I have ever addressed. This horrendous Tory government and its relentless media propaganda has only strengthened the resolve of masses of ordinary Scots. I was also very happy to see SNP MP’s and MSP’s actively participate, something missing from pro-Indy gatherings the last few years. This needs to be the start of a huge summer of full on campaigning.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

211 thoughts on “Jeremy Corbyn and Mhairi Black

1 2 3
  • Ottomanboi

    Which is more important some species of British socialism or freeing your country from dependency on another?
    Corbyn is fundamentally a London Labour politician. He may understand aspects of historic Irish nationalism, like Livingston before him, but in his appreciation of the contemporary Scottish variety he shows manifest ignorance.
    Scotland’s relationship with England has been as complex as that of Ireland’s. Both have experienced subversion, treachery, double dealing, cultural hegemony etc.,the old, imperialist, colonialist mantra in effect, but Scotland, owing to the rather bogus and divisive 1707 Union, has not attracted the support of English liberal opinion.
    Scottish nationalism to which I adhere is too easily subject to smear as ‘Blut und Boden’, crypto-fascist reaction. The fact that some in the SNP e.g. Nicola Sturgeon have problems with the style ‘Scottish nationalist’ is suggestive of an ideological ‘reticence’ which finds expression in the softly softly approach to independence and a sentimental attachment to British kith and kin insularity.
    I suspect the likes of Corbyn see Scotland in terms of England’s north-south divide.
    That is his problem not ours. We need to stay focused.

    • Sharp Ears

      ‘ experienced subversion, treachery, double dealing, cultural hegemony etc.,the old, imperialist, colonialist mantra in effect’

      Sounds like the experience of us here in England too at the hands of the pocket pols working on behalf of BIG CAPITAL.

      • reel guid

        You’re completely missing the point of Ottomanboi’s post. The English Left takes its cue in thinking about Scotland from the English Right, if it did but know it. We see it.

      • Alf Baird

        I tend to agree with what Craig is perhaps implying here – that there is probably more chance of Corbyn achieving Scottish independence than Sturgeon. Mind you I have also said there is more chance of Trump securing Scottish independence than Sturgeon. I suspect Corbyn would win a landslide in England (and Scotland and elsewhere in UK) if he offered to decolonise the UK by making the nations truly self-ruling though probably with some form of ongoing cooperation (free trade, people movement etc). The ‘union’ one-nation charade largely exists to maintain the class based hegemony of the Tory elite and their big money backers. Break the union and its Tory/monarchist hegemony and hello socialist republican independent (or perhaps ‘truly’ federal?) states. Brilliant, Mhari Black!

        • Ottomanboi

          Interesting scenario but I doubt Corbyn has the notion or the will to undertake something that in its consequences might do damage to English amour propre. The UK establishment has not fully recovered from the decolonization process which, let us remember, the UK was forced into by the rise of assertive nationalist movements. Underpinning the anglospheric spin put on Brexit there is some nostalgia for the rosy pink days of imperial glory. Scotland ‘defecting’ under its own democratic steam would be bad but an Englishmen encouraging it to ‘defect’ would be tantamount to high treason.
          The idea of a federal ‘British isles’ was proposed over a century ago to curtail Irish republicanism. Resurrecting the concept would be equally as futile.

          • Dennis Revell


            Hmmm. Looks like I’m guilty of ‘high treason’ then – an accusation I proudly accept.

            Treason against xenophobic, paranoic, austerity-blighted, Mass-Murdering serial War-Criminal leeeeetle inGRRRRland is World patriotism.


  • William Keenan

    Independence is coming, of that there is no doubt, however the main political driving force presently is the SNP, now I do admit they leave a lot to be desired in some respects, however I fear that if we drift away from them in not agreeing with what they are doing politically and put our votes elsewhere, it will open the field gate to our unionist opponents and they will take full advantage to make political hay, I can see the banner headlines now, SNP have had their day, etc.etc.
    We must strive to keep the SNP producing well thought out policies for Scotland and make sure they keep to the fore that the main aim is our country’s freedom while all the time protecting the things we all hold dear, eg: NHS/education/agriculture/fishing/infrastructure to name but a few.

  • Madelaine Davidson Lees

    There is a difference between the Irish and Scottish cases: Irland would be a *unification*, Scotland a *splitting*.

    If one includes the EU v Brexit issue, once again Ireland wants unity; Scotland disassociation.

    Plus voting for independence because one does not like the politics of one element of the union but not making sure that the disassociated “new” state will have different politics seems very short-sighted. Do Scots Independents think an independent Scotland will not be controlled by Capital?

    An intransigent part of the Cataluñan indepes are clearly backing a party (PDeCat/JuntsperCat) which has the worst pro-austerity and most corrupt history of any of the parties there. Their indepenence movement would be “out of the frying pan, into the fire” of right-wing austerity politics. And this when working together in a Spanish confederation (the other option that could be on offer) could move the balance to more socially conscious politics. ¿Still a good idea to go it alone, outside the EU?

    • reel guid

      And what was the setting up of the Irish Free State in 1922? A splitting? A disassociation? Yes I think so.
      Made complete in 1937 when it became a republic.

  • Sharp Ears

    Nothing from Washington so far on Trump’s plan to cancel the US involvement in the Iran deal. Johnson had to make do with Pompeo.

    Saw this. If I write YCNMIU one more time, I will scream.

    Trump’s choice presumably…and Murdoch’s.

    Oliver North: NRA elects Reagan-era figure as president
    7th May 2018
    Oliver North, a retired US Marine Colonel, was a National Security Council aide to Ronald Reagan.
    The influential US gun lobby the National Rifle Association (NRA) has elected a former aide to President Ronald Reagan as its new president.
    Oliver North, a retired US Marine Colonel, played a major role in the so-called Iran-Contra scandal.
    During the 1980s he created a network which secretly sold weapons to Iran and diverted the proceeds to fund armed Nicaraguan anti-communist groups.
    He later became a conservative radio host and was a Fox News contributor.
    Mr North announced he was retiring from Fox News in an NRA statement announcing his new role.
    The Iran-Contra scandal was arguably the major controversy of the Reagan presidency, as the US Congress had forbidden sending military aid to rebels in Nicaragua.
    In 1989, Mr North was convicted of three charges of unlawfully diverting US government funds.
    His convictions were quashed on appeal in 1990 as it was found that witnesses may have been influenced by previous congressional testimony.’

  • Pete

    Well I’ve lost much of the respect I previously had for Mhairi Black after reading her comments.

    She seems to have no grasp whatsoever of the difficult position that Corbyn is in. She ought to know surely that the “scandals” in the Labour Party are mostly generated maliciously from within, by Blairite Fifth Columnists. And when the SNP has been in power long enough, then they too will have attracted the kind of authoritarian money-grubbers and sycophants who flocked into New Labour when Blair was in power. And if she is SNP leader by then, she will have to deal with those people herself.

    Corbyn’s not perfect, as this demonstrates. He presumably admires Mhairi Black’s honesty and compassion, as I do too, even now. But he shouldn’t have spoken off the record to her. She is not on our side.

    • reel guid

      If he’s in a difficult position he should resign and let someone else have a try.

    • Hatuey

      “Labour manifesto ‘would keep £7bn of planned Tory welfare cuts”

      The interesting thing about those cuts to Jobseeker’s Allowance, housing benefit and child benefit (the areas specifically targeted by what we might have called Labour’s cuts) is that you’d struggle to find them in the Labour manifesto of 2017. They were very well hidden. I wonder who Corbyn and Labour want to hide them from?

      So, there you have it. Labour under Corbyn are the same old Red Tories. Far from being some sort of socialist revolutionary, Corbyn’s a welfare cutting Tory who thinks the poor should pay for the super profits and tax breaks of the rich.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Hatuey May 8, 2018 at 12:08
        Ah, that explains why the PTB are so single-mindedly attacking Jeremy from every which angle – the last thing the PTB want is a ‘Red Tory’?

      • Sharp Ears

        That Guardian (a Tory lite rag) article is a year old. Things have moved on.

        It quotes the Resolution Foundation which is often referred to by the Tory centric MSM. It is the creation of David Willietts, a bright Blue Tory. He arrived in the HoC in 1992 when .

        In a couple of the opening lines on there, you can see where he came from..ving served as Nigel Lawson’s private researcher, Willetts took charge of the Treasury monetary policy division at 26 before moving over to Margaret Thatcher’s Policy Unit at 28. Aged 31, he subsequently took over the Centre for Policy Studies.’

        Re Resolution Foundation today – Give every 25 year old the sum of £10,000 per annum. At the end of 2017 there were 5.6million 18-24 year olds. (ONS) 10,000 x 5.6million =

        They say the cost would be £7billion. Oh I see. Only give it to those born in Britain. Bad luck you refugees and immigrants.,

        What tripe. Where is that money coming from? Perhaps Mr Willetts’ friends in the Treasury will print some more.

        • Sharp Ears

          One might think the Intergenerational Commission was set up by the government. Wrong. The Resolution Foundation set it up.

          Those chosen were:

          • David Willetts, Executive Chair of the Resolution Foundation (Commission Chair)
          • Vidhya Alakeson, Chief Executive of Power to Change
          • Kate Barker, Chairman of Trustees, British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme
          • Torsten Bell, Director of the Resolution Foundation
          • Carolyn Fairbairn, Director General of the CBI
          • Geoffrey Filkin, Chairman of the Centre for Ageing Better
          • John Hills, Professor of Social Policy at the London School of Economics
          • Paul Johnson, Director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies
          • Sarah O’Connor, Investigations Correspondent and columnist at the Financial Times
          • Frances O’Grady, General Secretary of the TUC
          • Ben Page, Chief Executive of Ipsos MORI
          • Nigel Wilson, Group Chief Executive of Legal & General


        • Hatuey

          Yes, you’re very observant. The point I was making was about Corbyn’s manifesto going into last year’s general election.

      • FranzB

        Oh dear, you forgot the quote from the labour party in that article:-

        ‘However, Debbie Abrahams, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said Labour’s spending plans included £20bn over the next parliament to reverse Tory cuts to social security. She added that the party was committed “to ending the benefits freeze at the earliest opportunity”.’

        Who to believe? A Tory thinktank or a Labour Party politician. Such a difficult choice.

        • Hatuey

          £20 billion wouldn’t reverse Tory cuts. Labour have effectively supported austerity, as you know, when they could have opposed it. Abstaining isn’t opposition.

          • Bayard

            The problem in this discussion, like all similar discussions, is that “Labour” can mean either Blairite Labour, as like to Tories as two buttocks of the same bum, or pre and post Blairite Labour, which is significantly different. The UK hasn’t had a Labour government of the latter sort for many decades and the current Labour Party still has significant elements of Blairism in it. So there is no point in saying “Labour did this” or “Labour hasn’t done that”, when the Labour Party you are talking about is effectively the red wing of the Tory Party, so yes, of course they “have effectively supported austerity”, duh.

    • BrianPowell

      She is talking about what he does not about what others are doing.

    • Lee Denness

      How very true Pete. He must have spoken to her, believing her to be as noble as he is himself. However, despite supposed political maturity, she has now let herself down which is sad for her and for everybody else of good heart. Just an extra knife between Corbyn shoulder blades, metaphorically, one hopes.
      He is such a brave guy, who else would still be there fighting for people like you and me after so much adversity?
      Do you think if the next Labour manifesto promised PR we could win by a handsome margin and stop these Tory parasites from ever controlling our lives again?
      Surely the promise of PR would attract a vote from many in the Greens, Lib Dems, Plaid, Cymru, even the SNP etc., because it would be in their interest too, and it would in the future ensure a worthwhile vote for everybody who took part.
      Currently thousands of votes are lost in sea of blue Tory which is totally undemocratic.

    • Jo

      I agree.

      As a WASPI woman I think the work Mhairi has done to represent women in my situation is fantastic. As an early 20s young woman why should she care about us? Yet she does and she has worked very hard on our behalf not just for Scottish WASPI women but for all throughout the UK while most established and more experienced female Labour MPs have done little or nothing. Their main focus has been to plot constantly against their current leader while whining about misogyny and bullying despite behaving like a vicious mob themselves.

      I wish Mhairi Black hadn’t said this about Corbyn. I feel she did him a great wrong.

    • Dennis Revell


      No matter. Hopefully the deep respect earned by Mhairi Black has increased amongst many others, owing to her refusal to play the bullshit political game of private ‘back-room’ conversations between poliiticians, as mine has.

      KUDOS to her; May be she saw some ot the corrupt Clintonesque “public/private” positions crap in this; as I did.


  • JackM

    Scotland never had the hunger for freedom like the Irish, who tried the fruitless political route and succeeded with the armed route and never gave up

  • IM

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the Scottish King (James VI) save the English Crown post-Elizabeth I?

    • Susan Smith

      Not really – there were 5 other Protestant claimants defended from Henry VIII’s sisters Mary and Margaret and from the Yorkist Plantagenets .

  • mrjohn

    I think the English should vote on Scottish independence, and Welsh and Irish. Do the English want to continue to be attached to these countries? I suspect the answer would be “No”.

    • JOML

      Are you not talking about English independence? The ball is in your court.

    • Bayard

      Yes and everyone in the British Isles should vote on Irish reunification, but the politicians will always choose the constituency that is most likely to give them the answer they want.

    • Iain Stewart

      “Do the English want to continue to be attached to these countries?”
      Then the English could do us all a big favour and leave the UK.

  • Rhys Jaggar

    Mhairi Black may well become SNP leader, but whilst idealism is a trait developed early, judicious judgement often takes longer to emerge…..

    I am not surprised she is making youthful mistakes from the best of intentions, she is after all very youthful for a politician.

  • Tony

    I have enormous respect for these two individuals. However, I think that Mhairi Black should not have said this.

    The Trident issue will definitely need to be re-visited and soon. Such a compromise should only have been seen as a temporary matter.

    I also do not think that Corbyn should have supported the expulsion of the Russian diplomats as Russian guilt in the attacks on the Skripals is far from certain. However, Corbyn does represent considerable progress and that needs to be acknowledged.

    We should recognise the sense of disappointment and work to change this.

    Incidentally, I think that Craig should do an article about collaboration between the unionist parties at the last election. There seems to have been an awful lot of this.

  • Stan McConnell

    I believed at the time and I still do, that Nicola’s insistence that the snap election had nothing to do with the independence question, when Ruth Davidson and Kezia Dugdale were making it specifically about that very thing, was a major tactical blunder. I don’t believe we’d have lost half the seats we did if the independence supporters had been sufficiently motivated to turn out for the vote. Water under the bridge of course, but understanding that, if I’m correct, should have meant no loss of confidence in the cause by the SNP leadership.

    • Jo

      There are different views about why those twenty-one seats were lost. Some believe it was due to the possibility of Indyref2 looming.

      • kathy

        There was a huge amount of tactical voting by both Labour and Tory voters targetting SNP seats. For example, Kezia Dugdale told Labour voters to vote Tory in seats where Tories were more likely to win than Labour. That was a big factor.

          • kathy

            Yes it was mainly anti-ref2 but I think there was also a Corbyn factor among the labour voters.

  • Antonio Carlos

    When I read this blog and the arguments put forward I keep on getting the (maybe) unworthy thought of what the hell are you winging about and why is it that you believe that running away from the fight in the guise of Independence is going to resolve anything in the medium to long term.
    The problems that the Scottish people claim to suffer under Westminster Government are no different to the problems that the rest of the people of these once fair isles suffer. You talk about Scottish Tribal Politics, well Tribal politics are not exactly unknown on the English side of the border and while on both sides the publicly stated issues are different underneath the main issue for the drivers within the tribes is the same, power and who gets to wield it and benefit from it . That’s personal benefit not social public benefit, a sociopath is a sociopath be he from the north or south of the border.
    If you believe that the Blairites and the Tories are the enemies of the Scottish people consider also the fact that they are also the enemies of the majority of the English people as well.
    So the SNP is loosing a bit of ground in Scotland well maybe they should think about widening their horizons and start looking to attract English voters with a view to winning English seats and doing a reverse takeover, their are many this side of the border who would welcome the chance to vote for anybody but the choice we have now.

    • kathy

      We can only save ourselves. English refugees will be welcome if we ever achieve independence.

      • Dennis Revell


        Agreed – but gonna have to be careful with the InGRRRlish refugees thing – there might be an AWFUL LOT of them.

        I’m InGRRRlish btw, but not resident there – so would just get in the queue for a Scottish passport 😉 .


  • Charles Billette

    Regarding Mhairi Black, I do not believe that she would lie about anything at all. As well as being totally honest, she is a very smart young woman.She commands huge respect in Scotland and elsewhere.

    • Jo

      Actually, I don’t think we’re debating whether she lied. It’s more about revealing the content of a private conversation to the media and potentially damaging someone as a result. I think some are dismayed by that and respect her less for doing it.

      • Dennis Revell


        Really? My respect for Mhairi Black went up; as she’s clearly not in the dismal poltical game of backdoor conversations and the holding of “public and private positions” as per the War Gorgon Clinton.

        Anyway this is a case of Corbyn YET AGAIN exhibiting bad judgement by telling Mhairi Black this – something that makes him a dodgy prospect for PM anyway. Does he not know that Mhairi Black is “so disappointed with Jeremy Corbyn, so disappointed” ?:-

        As I am.


  • Sharp Ears

    A Con MP who is an ex Times stringer, is now attacking Seumas Milne via the Heil for being a Russian propagandist. Any way to attack Jeremy.will suffice for the Tories.

    Tory MP accuses Corbyn’s spin chief Seumas Milne of peddling Russian propaganda while he worked as a Guardian columnist
    Bob Seely said questions must be asked about the actions of Seumas Milne
    He said it was unclear whether Milne shared Kremlin beliefs or was an active ‘agent of influence’ on behalf of Vladimir Putin
    Isle of Wight MP made claims based on Milne columns during Ukraine invasion

    This Tory trash is SO transparent. Pathetic.

  • labougie

    Did the SNP just vote down Milliband’s Leveson Clause 18 amendment?

  • Gary

    I agree entirely on Corbyn’s point of view in regard to independence. He has said publicly that ‘It is a matter for Scottish voters’ (I paraphrase) But immediately the PLP set upon him, as they have done over Trident also.

    In no way do the PLP represent the views of members or voters of Labour but the party took it’s eye off the ball for decades and has, essentially, be infiltrated by right-wingers who now control the parliamentary party.

    This despite them having left to formed the SDP, having failed to get support under this brand, having joined with the Liberals and failed to win support as Lib Dems they infiltrated and sought to destroy from within,

    Hopefully Momentum will be successful in dragging Labour back to the left from it’s current position as Tory-Lite. The genuine Labour that I know will support the decision of the Scottish people without seeking to influence it.

    At the time of the referendum PLP sought to cut SLAB out of decision making on policy by having the entire UK decide on the policy and forcing their opinion down the throat of SLAB. Even to the extent of Milliband ripping the heart out of SLAB proposals for an alternative to Indy. Despite two years work the finished document looked like it’s been hurriedly typed up the night before like a late homework assignment…

  • reg

    There is a fundamental problem with Scottish independence that is the SNPs proposed relationship with the EU. Scottish independence without an independent currency under the hegemony of the EU is not independence, so SNPs economic policy is utterly incoherent. Being English with Scots relatives I was initially in support of Scottish independence as this would reduce the malign influence of the UKs imperialist ambitions, for a similar reasons I supported the UK leaving the EU as it would reduce the UKs neo-liberal influence on the EU and weaken the ordoliberal (German neo-liberalism) influence of Germany and make it easier to reform the EU (although the structure makes this difficult as Varafacuss found out when he tried to reform the EU as Greek finance minister). Scottish independence would also make it difficult for the UK to be able to afford to maintain a nuclear deterrent and without that it is difficult to justify the UKs continued presence as a permanent member of the UN able to veto proposals, so far so good. This is why Nicola Sturgens policies on adopting the Euro and support for the EU is a profound disappointment particularly given the treatment of the Catalans and Greece. Sturgens ravings about malign Russian influence indicate nothing will change under Scottish independence and will become a vassal state of US imperialism, and its US client colonies in the EU rather like an independent Ireland has become a tax haven for US economic imperialism and its support for neo-liberal polices such as bailing out the unsecured assets of the financial sector. The SNPs economic policy is economicaly illiterate and not sustainable so is unlikely to lead to Scottish independence even as a EU colony.

    The problems being.
    The State Aid Rules required for EU membership
    The Fiscal compact requiring debt to GDP to be less than 60% and deficit to GDP of less than 3% with the threat of 0.5% of GDP fine enforced by the unelected EU commission.
    Free movement of Capital required by the single market. With the Scottish government not able to create money by its central bank, leaving money creation solely to the ECB and its private banks mean that Scotland would be borrowing in an effective foreign currency and would unable to act as a lender of last resort to its banks via Scotland’s central bank. How do you think Scotland would fare if a bank like RBS fell over again and its banks were unable to supply liquidity via its central bank?

    Schäuble the former German finance minister also suggests having an unelected EU budget commissioner to pre approve members budgets as part of a move towards closer political and economic union (as Schäuble’s FT article below suggests). Sovereignty is not possible without a sovereign currency and the ability to run an independent budget and monetary policy, the ability to undertake state aid to rebalance its economy as the electorate and its representatives see fit and the ability to restrict speculative destabilizing hot money flows.

    Obviously Scottish independence is credible, but not under SNP proposals to join the Euro, proposals that Iceland was sensible enough to shelve. As Iceland has managed to recover while remaining one of the most egalitarian countries in the world as it did not bail out the banks and even jailed some. Surly this would be a better model for an independent Scotland?

    This to me does not look like any kind of Scottish independence as an outsider?

    More integration is still the right goal for Europe – Karl Lamers and Wolfgang Schäuble Financial Times 31 Aug 2014 states “Why not have a European budget commissioner with powers to reject national budgets if they do not correspond to the rules we jointly agreed?”

  • Steve Hayes

    “…the decolonisation process of burying the British Empire.”

    It never was a British empire. it was an English empire and the ending of that empire still has a long way to go. Gibraltar, the Cayman Islands, the north of Ireland, the Falkland Islands, the British Virgin Islands, Wales, Bermuda, British Indian Ocean territory, jersey, the Isle of Man, etc – Scotland is only one of a long list.

  • Dennis Revell


    I have to fundamentally disagree that Mhairi Black was in any way in the wrong to reveal the private pro-Scottish Independence position of Corbyn, and that he would push for either that or denuclearisation should he become PM. I also disagree, as an InGRRRlish Scottish Nationalist (I know) that Jeremy Corbyn is admirable – likeable I’m sure he is, as pretty much ALL politicians are face to face – for the most part they’re past masters at the faking sincerity act thing.

    In my view, Corbyn, affable though he seems, has exhibited a level of incompetence that I think is very worrying for a possible future PM – in fact that incompetence may well prevent him from ever achieving that position:


    Firstly, whilst not identical, Corbyn keeping his WELL KNOWN (denuclearisation) public positions and those previously unknown (Scottish Independence) on the relevant issues muted smacks FAR too much to me of War Gorgon Clinton’s “public and private” positions. He is a frightened little man who is remarkably still vastly swayed by the mainstream media and afeared of the sway he believes they still have over public opinion – in that regard, and I do not say this lightly, he SHOULD have learned a lot from the Donald Trump campaign. He didn’t.

    Secondly I’ve thought for a long time that Corbyn simple hasn’t realised how much of Corbyn Labour’s massively increased membership and support MUST have come from the 1.6 to 2 million demonstrators against the Iraq atrocity – those to whom Corbyn made stirring speeches – in the largest demonstration in British if not World history back in 2003 – I have no doubt that some of those, like me, have since become dissappointed with him and “dropped off”.

    Let’s see how Mr. Corbyn’s anti-war credential have stood up since then, well since becoming “Labour” Party leader. He inherited a Shadow Cabinet 15 member of which were voting MPs back in 2003, and EVERY SINGLE ONE of which voted FOR the atrocity against Iraq – in my book ALL War-Criminals. Now, AFAIK, the “Labour” leader chooses his own Shadow Cabinet. Corbyn fired NOT A ONE of them – hmmm- so his anti-war gleam seemed to have rusted a bit since he thought he could sniff the reins of power. To clarify that: later some of those DID resign or were fired, but that had NOTHING to do with their pro-Blair-wars positions, but only considerably later when many of them tried to do the Brutus-Caesar thing over the leadership contest.

    EVEN NOW, a majority of Shadow Cabinet members who were MPs back in 2003 voted for that atrocity (five out of nine).


    Even more blatantly, or less, take your pick, another thing that is supposed to be a power of the “Labour” Party leader is whether or not to impose the whip on various parliamentary divisions (votes). Well, I was quite astonished when Corbyn allowed a free vote on bombing Syria – ABSOLUTELY appalling. Yea, I’m sure some of the Blairite MPs would have defied the whip – which of these did so would have been useful information all in itself for those who should be targetted for replacement in their constituencies.


    In any case, I believe Corbyn will NOT be permitted to become PM until the recommendations of the Naylor Report are more thoroughly and IRREVERSIBLY implemented (irreversible without a revolution), and even then it is doubtful. He really should have learned the one and only valuable lesson that the far more assertive Donald Trump had to teach. I have dubbed him: “Corbyn-the-Compromiser-Too-Far”.

    LONG LIVE MHAIRI BLACK, move over Nicola, it’s time to go.


1 2 3

Comments are closed.