Brian Wilson: Secession leads to a dangerous end, The Scotsman

THE offer of a package of powers for Holyrood should have happened earlier, but at least it has happened now, writes Brian Wilson

AS, MERCIFULLY, the finishing line approaches, there is one phrase which stands out in my over-loaded recollection of the Scottish referendum campaign. It came from Pope Francis and he was not speaking specifically about Scotland, so much as division of countries and peoples in general.

The critical distinction he drew was between “independence for emancipation and independence for secession”. In a more intellectually demanding age, every nuance of the debate would have been measured against that yardstick. What exactly are we being asked to liberate ourselves from, and at what human cost, risk and precedent?

I was reminded yet again of the Pope Francis test when Alex Salmond, chief architect of division, this week drew an astonishing analogy between people registering for the Scottish referendum and “the scenes in South Africa…when people queued up to vote in the first free elections”. Here, surely, we were listening to a man operating at the delusory limits of self-aggrandisement.

To claim comparison between the suffering of South Africa’s black population, on the basis of institutionalised racism, and the position of Scotland within the UK is ludicrous and offensive. Disappointing though it may be to his followers, Mr Salmond is not the Biko of Banff but a shrewd populist who is adept at pressing buttons which would be best left unpressed and at driving wedges where none need exist.

Having wrapped himself in the flag that used to belong to all of us, Salmond wants us to take sides between “Team Scotland” and “Team Westminster”. Within that not very subtle code lies the insidious folly of what he is promoting. Everyone who follows him is, by definition, in “Team Scotland” while dissenters are branded as supporters of a hostile, alien entity.

Why not read more here ?

How SNP once kicked out 'royal hating' Salmond: Scottish National Party leader was once member of Republican faction expelled from party in the 1980s, Daily Mail

Salmond part of Republican faction expelled from SNP in 1980s

The 79 Group wanted to set up Scottish Socialist republic

Removal of Queen as Scotland's head of state one of its founding principles

Fervent Republicanism contrasts to his current support for the Queen

Alex Salmond was a leading member of a Republican faction that was expelled from the Scottish National Party in the 1980s.

The 79 Group – named after the year in which it was formed – wanted to set up a Scottish Socialist republic and spent several years fighting for more radical policies within the SNP. 

The removal of the Queen as Scotland’s head of state was one of its founding principles.

The group even had links with Irish republican party Sinn Fein at the height of the Troubles in Northern Ireland.

Mr Salmond was one of its three spokesmen and took responsibility for publicity. He argued for greater militancy among workers, and advocated direct action including civil disobedience, according to his biographer, David Torrance.

‘I think Her Majesty the Queen, who has seen so many events in the course of her long reign, will be proud to be Queen of Scots as indeed we have been proud to have her as the monarch,’ the SNP leader said this week. But earlier this year, Mr MacAskill suggested there could be a referendum on scrapping the monarchy if Scots vote Yes.

He said in March: ‘We will inherit the situation we have with the Queen as head of state in the ceremonial capacity that she has. But it will be for the people of Scotland to decide.

‘If and when that would occur, if they wished to have a referendum, and we would hope we would become the government post-2016, it will be for whoever is in office then.’

The 79 Group, which was formally known as the ‘Interim Committee of the 79 Group Socialist Society’, was formed after the 1979 referendum asking Scots whether they wanted their own Scottish Assembly with devolved powers.

Read more here:

Gordon Brown: This is Scotland's moment of destiny, The Guardian

For some time now I have been arguing that the whole of the UK must respond to the clear demand for constitutional change, and earlier this week I proposed a timetable to deliver a stronger Scottish parliament. But Scots are also leading the discussion on a new idea of citizenship for the global era, one that recognises the strength of national identity and wants to bring power closer to the people. Yet it also understands that, after wave after wave of globalisation, our ability to seize opportunities and make rights come alive is now being shaped within a vast network of global economic interrelationships – a network over which we feel we have too little power.

When I set out plans for a more modern constitution in 2007 I was thinking of a new citizenship for the global era. Our later measures – parliament's power to declare peace and war, MPs to be subject to a right to recall, an end to the royal prerogative, an elected Lords – were about a 21st-century democracy, with citizenship to be founded on a new bill of rights and responsibilities and, in time, a written constitution. There was little public or media appetite for change at that time. The MPs' expenses crisis should have triggered sweeping reforms but, in the wake of the global economic collapse, all talk of constitutional change had to take second place to preventing an economic recession from turning into a full blown depression and to getting us back to growth.

But across Europe we are now seeing the rise of both anti-establishment, anti-immigrant parties of the right and secessionist movements, such as the one in Scotland. It is not just because of the referendum that Scotland has moved centre stage – there are two other reasons. First: because of Scotland's experience of the most dramatic deindustrialisation we have become more aware of how our future rights and opportunities are tied to managing globalisation better. And second: because of our unique experience of being a stateless nation – which has for 300 years seen benefits in cooperation across nations – we have a unique contribution to make to what citizenship means for a more interdependent world.

Twice since 1707, Scots have redefined ideas of what citizenship means. First, the Scots Enlightenment gave the world the idea of civil society, of a citizen who is neither subject nor just consumer, and of a modern citizenship that stands between markets and states. Then, as they confronted the turmoil and injustices of the industrial revolution, Scots led the way to a 20th-century citizenship that guarantees social and economic as well as civil and political rights.

In the post-union, stateless Scotland of the 18th and early 19th centuries, Scots Enlightenment philosophers taught people to think of themselves as both citizens of their local community and citizens of the world. From Adam Smith and David Hume came the idea of the "civil" society, which taught us there was a space between the state and the individual, a public sphere that need not be dominated by markets and where people could come together in their own voluntary associations, from churches and trade unions to civic and municipal organisations.

Read more here:

Senior SNP figure threatens BP with nationalisation and cutting banks down to size for being 'in cahoots with rich English Tories' Daily Mail, The SNP show their true colours

  Former SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars lashes out at pro-Union businesses

  He asked: 'Who do these companies think we are? They will find out'

  BT Group chair Sir Mike Rake says 'Yes' would 'inevitably' cause a slowdown

  CBI boss claims this could 'easily' last for a decade because of uncertainty

  Comes after IMF warned separation could result in financial market turmoil

  Five Scottish based banks this week warned they would move to England

  Richard Branson is the latest business figure to oppose independence

  Asda, Waitrose, B&Q and Screwfix say prices would rise after independence

  Marks & Spencer set to join firms warning against 'Yes' vote next week

  Comes as poll shows 'No' campaign four points ahead with six days to go 

  Separate poll released today put the 'Yes' campaign just two points behind 

The former deputy leader of the Scottish nationalists has threatened a 'day of reckoning' for businesses that have spoken out against independence.

SNP grandee Jim Sillars lashed out after a host of banks, finance firms, supermarkets and retail giants warned about the dangers of separation.

Mr Sillars said oil giant BP would be nationalised 'in part or in whole' while bankers and big business chiefs would be punished for 'being in cahoots' with the Tories.

The remarks are likely to increase business anxiety over independence just six days before next week's referendum. 

The 'Yes' to independence campaign's economic case for independence was further damaged after one of Britain's most influential industrialists Sir Mike Rake warned that Scotland’s economy could be damaged for a decade if it votes for independence.

But Mr Sillars vowed to punish big business for siding with the 'No' campaign against independence.

He said: ‘This referendum is about power, and when we get a Yes majority, we will use that power for a day of reckoning with BP and the banks.

Read more here:

Peevish and bristling, Salmond exploded at man from the Beeb. Daily Mail

Scotland do you really want this arrogant,  little man to lead you ?

This was meant to be the day Alex Salmond showed off his statesmanlike qualities to the world.

But instead of meeting the founding father of a brave new nation, the world’s media came to his grandly-named ‘international press conference’ to find a peevish man bristling with indignation over the parochial details of a very inconvenient truth.

For the grandest bank in Scotland had just announced it would pack up the boardroom and move its HQ to London if Scots vote for independence next week.

The RBS has been domiciled in Edinburgh since the days of George II. It could hardly be worse if Scottish Widows became Surrey Widows or Nessie suddenly moved ponds to Windermere.

Not so, according to Mr Salmond. The loss of the RBS would be a footling matter. The real scandal was that the news had been leaked to the BBC.

And they could only have got it from one source: ‘scaremongering’ officials at the Treasury. The fact that market-sensitive information had ended up in the hands of the media, he said, almost quivering with displeasure, was a matter of ‘extraordinary gravity, as serious a matter as you can possibly get’.

As journalists argued that RBS’s vote of no confidence in its motherland was the bigger deal, Mr Salmond was having none of it, particularly when questioned by BBC political editor Nick Robinson.

Arguing that it involved little more than the relocation of a ‘brass plaque’, Mr Salmond demanded that the BBC be dragged before an official investigation and made to blab.

‘Scotland is on the cusp of making history,’ Mr Salmond went on. ‘The eyes of the world are upon us. And what the world is seeing is an energised, articulate and peaceful debate.’ The ears of the world only had to wait five seconds longer before they heard the day’s first attack on ‘the blatant bullying and intimidation of Westminster government’.

Pretty much any irksome statistic could be attributed to ‘scaremongering’, ‘bullying’, public schoolboy politics’ and so on from That Lot.

Until very recently, international interest in this debate had not extended much beyond the provincial press in countries with an ongoing separatist squabble – principally Spain and Quebec.

Yesterday, there were earnest questions about future Scottish relations with Russia, Brazil and India. Perhaps the trickiest came from a German television presenter. She asked Mr Salmond to explain in what ways the English had a different identity from the Scots ‘because our audience don’t see it’.

‘This campaign of ours does not depend on identity,’ he replied.

Out in the streets right now, it seems to depend on little else.

Read more here:

Rattled Salmond launches rant at the BBC after it revealed Royal Bank of SCOTLAND will quit country after 'Yes' vote. Daily Mail

  First Minister lashes out at broadcaster to deflect row over threat by banks

  RBS one of four major banks to turn its back on independent Scotland

  John Lewis, Waitrose and Asda say prices will rise if there is a Yes victory 

  SNP leader was accused of lying about oil reserves by industry members

  He calls for official inquiry into Treasury source who leaked RBS story 

  Insurance giant Standard Life said it would move south days after Yes vote

Alex Salmond today launched an extraordinary rant at the BBC after the broadcaster reported how even the Royal Bank of Scotland planned to relocate to England in the event of independence.

In a bizarre press conference he launched a series of petulant attacks on the BBC, Westminster leaders and the Australian prime minister.

And he revealed he has called for an official inquiry into the Treasury's 'deliberate attempt to cause uncertainty in the financial markets' by leaking details of RBS's fears about the break up of the Union.

The First Minister presided over an astonishing press conference for the world's press corps in which he was tetchy, rattled and – according to several observers – 'losing the plot'.

Another observer suggested this was Mr Salmond's 'Sheffield rally', a reference to Neil Kinnock's ill-fated cry of 'We're alright!' before he went on to lose the 1992 General Election.

At one point there was an ugly clash between the SNP leader and BBC political editor Nick Robinson over the fate of Scotland's banks if there is a Yes vote in next week's referendum.

Read more here:

Now the Union strikes back: Poll puts No campaign in the lead as Scottish separatists suffer a series of hammer blows on Salmond's Black Wednesday. Daily Mail

  SNP leader was accused of lying about oil reserves by industry members 

  Insurance giant Standard Life said it would move south days after Yes vote 

  Poll found 53% of Scots would vote against splitting up the United Kingdom

  Will ease panic on Sunday that put the Yes campaign ahead  

  Leading oilman also dismissed Mr Salmond's energy-rich future as 'fantasy'

Scottish separatists suffered a series of hammer blows yesterday in the battle for the future of Britain.

On what was being dubbed Alex Salmond’s Black Wednesday, the SNP leader was accused of lying about oil reserves, a poll put the No camp back in the lead and big firms admitted they were considering moving to England.

The poll found 53 per cent of Scots would say No in next week’s referendum on independence. The Survation survey put the Yes camp on 47 per cent. One in ten are yet to decide.

Mr Salmond’s vision of an energy-rich future was dismissed as a fantasy by a leading Scottish oilman and BP and Shell also came out against independence.

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney piled on the pressure by warning that Edinburgh would have to set aside around £130billion to guarantee savers’ bank deposits.

Read more here:

Further Reading

Exposed, Alex Salmond's great oil wealth fantasy: Experts attack claims that an independent Scotland could become rich on its oil and gas resources

Alex Salmond’s biggest lie, that an independent Scotland could float onward and upward on the strength its oil and gas resources, has finally been nailed.

The greatest authority on Scottish oil, Sir Ian Wood – together with the bosses of BP and Shell – has exposed it as pure fantasy.

Wood, founder of Scotland’s world-leading oil services firm Wood Group, has accused the Scottish Nationalists of misleading voters with ‘highly inaccurate forecasts, false promises and misleading information’.

His intervention, along with that of Bob Dudley of BP and Ben van Beurden of Shell, delivers a devastating blow to claims being made by Salmond and his acolytes that North Sea oil, augmented by unexploited opportunities using relatively new ‘fracking’ techniques, could turn Scotland into the next Norway.

The slogan ‘It’s Scotland’s Oil’ has, in the four decades since the first North Sea crude was brought ashore, been the most powerful weapon in the armoury of the SNP.

Nationalists like to compare Scotland to Norway because the Nordic nation has become rich on its oil and gas revenues, and has built up investment funds of more than £460billion on the back of its energy bonanza.

But the bitter truth is that an independent Scottish economy based on North Sea oil riches is a canard. Even on the most optimistic projections, with the exploration companies using the most modern techniques to frack for oil and gas deep below the oceans, the UK and Scotland’s energy boom is over.

Ann McKechin: Alex Salmond and the SNP's tax policies will create more inequality in an independent Scotland, Daily Record

Sep 09, 2014 11:238 OPINION BY ANNMCKECHIN

ANN McKECHIN puts forward her view that the economic policies of the SNP will only drive an even greater divide between the have and have-nots should Scotland vote Yes.

SCOTLAND'S future will be decided in just a few days’ time when voters across the country go to the polls.

It’s clear that voters want change – they want to see more jobs paying decent wages and offering security; they want affordable housing; they want a social care system that is fit for purpose; and they want an energy market that works for consumers not the profits of big energy.

The Scottish National Party has been keen to persuade voters that breaking off from the rest of the UK would create a ‘northern light’ for social justice – a Scotland that is more just, more humane and more socially democratic. But their message is deliberately high in emotion but lacking in substance.

However, a Scotland which followed the policies outlined in the SNP’s white paper and ended the system of pooling and sharing resources across the UK would quickly find income and wealth would be more unequally distributed than in the country they wish to break up. SNP tax policies will astonish all those used to hearing the claim that, from the day after independence, it would recreate the social democratic state that London has left behind.

Let’s look at the recent evidence. The SNP has refused to commit an independent Scotland to Labour’s proposal for a 50p top rate of tax. It has also refused to support a new top band of council tax. The First Minister keeps telling top business leaders that he is not planning to change the rates of income tax or business from those that apply currently across the UK.

Independent Scotland won't pay back debt, Alex Salmond says

First Minister reportedly taunted the Westminster government over whether an independent Scotland should take on its share of the national debt, saying: “What are they going to do – invade?”

Read more here:

Why don't we tell the Scots to shove off! In a personal view (which the Mail disagrees with) SIMON HEFFER says what we fear many English people think, Daily Mail

Alex Salmond's offensive comparison of Scots voting for independence to the ending of apartheid and blacks being given the vote in South Africa took the rank dishonesty of the nationalists’ campaign to a new low yesterday.

Mandela went to prison for his beliefs, something that doesn’t appear to have happened to any Scottish Nationalists.

And, far from being victims of a cruel and unjust system, they have been encouraged to participate in the political process, and to live in a Union replete with opportunities — unlike millions in South Africa who were excluded from politics and advancement simply because they were the wrong race.

It was equally offensive to see Mr Salmond embracing immigrants from Eastern Europe and telling them that their intention to vote ‘Yes’ would be the culmination of their own long walk to freedom.

They chose to come to Scotland not because independence promises an extra layer of liberty, but because of the hard won, wide-ranging freedoms already available throughout the UK, and bestowed upon the Scots as they are bestowed upon every other Briton. 

Enough, frankly, is enough. We have long tolerated Mr Salmond’s mendacity, and his twisted loathing of the English, largely because many felt he would be the loser of this fight and should be indulged.

So when he dropped hints that the NHS would be privatised if there wasn’t a ‘Yes’ vote, or made up the rules about Scotland’s continuing membership of the EU as he went along, or exaggerated the wealth from Scottish oil revenues, we felt slightly patronising towards the old rogue, assuring ourselves of his inevitable humiliation in the September 18 vote.

Now that humiliation appears less certain, and the arrogant dishonesty is so overwhelming, it is time to tell him what some of us really think.

Read more here:

Don't rip our family apart': At last, the PM gets passionate about the Union and warns there will be NO going back if Yes vote wins. Daily Mail

  EXCLUSIVE: PM issues rallying cry for the 'special alchemy of the UK'

  Together, he says, the nation fills the rest of the world with 'awe and envy'

  Plea came after heated debate as just eight days remain before polls open

  Three banks warned of calamity as Bank of England rejected plan for sterling

  Alex Salmond prompted anger with comparisons to post-Apartheid vote

David Cameron today issues a highly personal plea to the people of Scotland not to ‘rip apart’ the United Kingdom.

Writing in the Daily Mail, the Prime Minister tells Scots that the rest of the UK ‘desperately wants you to stay’.

But he warns there will be no second chances after next week’s referendum: ‘If the UK breaks apart, it breaks apart for ever.’

With opinion polls suggesting the referendum is now too close to call, Mr Salmond dismissed Westminster’s promises about more powers. ‘This is the day the No campaign finally disintegrated and fell apart at the seams,’ the first minister said. ‘Together, David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg are the most distrusted Westminster politicians ever – and their collective presence in Scotland will be another massive boost for the Yes campaign.

‘The message of this extraordinary, last-minute reaction is that the Westminster elite are in a state of absolute panic as the ground in Scotland shifts under their feet.’

Read more here:

What bright spark thought bullying and patronising us Scots was the way to win our votes? Daily Mail

These are dark times to be a Scot, a Unionist and a ‘No’ voter. After the referendum polls finally flipped in favour of a ‘Yes’ vote at the weekend, we should be in no doubt: it’s a real possibility that in just nine days’ time the United Kingdom will be voted out of existence.

As that sad prospect grows more likely, Alex Salmond’s cocky smirk spreads ever wider and there’s an arrogance to the separatists that manifests itself in withering contempt for the views, arguments and emotions of the many people like me who want to stay British. There’s an extra chill in the Scottish air this autumn.

At times, I feel like a stranger in a strange land. In Stirling — my peaceful, semi-rural hometown, which sits halfway between Edinburgh and Glasgow — posters put up by the Better Together campaign have had the word ‘Scum’ scrawled across them, or been ripped down altogether.

Relationships with friends, colleagues, even family members, have become strained in this bruising climate.

It’s one thing to have to tolerate abuse from the other side — the organised mobbing, hectoring and egg-throwing that forced the former Labour Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy to call off his tour making the case for a united Britain was only the most visible example.

Equally, there’s no point denying the SNP-led Yes campaign has done its job well, mixing energy and passion with cynical but effective attacks on all aspects of Britain and, especially, Westminster.

What’s harder to take than any of this is the feeling that the campaign to save the Union — probably the most important political fight of our lifetimes — has been a lame, misjudged and overly negative affair.

Take last week, when Better Together launched a series of posters aimed at persuading the 10 per cent or so of voters who remain undecided to stick with the UK.

Read more here:

Scots, What the Heck? NY Times

Next week Scotland will hold a referendum on whether to leave the United Kingdom. And polling suggests that support for independence has surged over the past few months, largely because pro-independence campaigners have managed to reduce the “fear factor” — that is, concern about the economic risks of going it alone. At this point the outcome looks like a tossup.

Well, I have a message for the Scots: Be afraid, be very afraid. The risks of going it alone are huge. You may think that Scotland can become another Canada, but it’s all too likely that it would end up becoming Spain without the sunshine.

Comparing Scotland with Canada seems, at first, pretty reasonable. After all, Canada, like Scotland, is a relatively small economy that does most of its trade with a much larger neighbor. Also like Scotland, it is politically to the left of that giant neighbor. And what the Canadian example shows is that this can work. Canada is prosperous, economically stable (although I worry about high household debt and what looks like a major housing bubble) and has successfully pursued policies well to the left of those south of the border: single-payer health insurance, more generous aid to the poor, higher overall taxation.

Does Canada pay any price for independence? Probably. Labor productivity is only about three-quarters as high as it is in the United States, and some of the gap may reflect the small size of the Canadian market (yes, we have a free-trade agreement, but a lot of evidence shows that borders discourage trade all the same). Still, you can argue that Canada is doing O.K.

Read more here:

The final push for Alex Salmond’s land of fantasy, Telegraph

It is Thursday morning on Buchanan Street, Glasgow’s busiest shopping thoroughfare, and Scotland’s First Minister is doing what he does best: smirking.

Working his way through a boisterous crowd of placard-wielding Yes supporters, Alex Salmond revels in the adoration of his fans and poses for countless “selfies” with starstruck Nationalists out to pay homage on the 10th anniversary of his return as leader of the Scottish National Party.

The choice of location for this event, right in the middle of Glasgow, is very deliberate. With less than a fortnight until Scots vote on whether to leave the United Kingdom, Scotland’s largest city has turned into the front line in the referendum battle. To win, the Nationalists need to convert voters in the west of Scotland, where Labour has traditionally been strong.

Mr Salmond, a gambler and racing-loving punter who relishes the thrill of the chase, is confident he has Labour and the Better Together pro-Union campaign on the run. “The ground is shifting below their feet,” he says.

The race has certainly tightened. Last week, a poll by YouGov showed the No lead narrowing sharply to only six points (53 to 47 per cent when don’t knows are stripped out).

It prompted concern at Westminster, and in the City the markets were spooked. Investors who had presumed there was no chance of a Yes vote sold off shares in companies that trade on both sides of the border between England and Scotland. Polls this weekend are expected to show Yes getting even closer.

Read more here;

Gordon Brown vows to lead Scottish campaign to win more powers for Edinburgh if voters reject independence. Daily Mail

Gordon Brown today vowed to lead the campaign for more powers for Scotland if it rejects independence in this month’s referendum.

The former prime minister, signalling his return to front line politics, said he
would push for further devolution within weeks of the September 18 vote.

Mr Brown is among senior Labour figures being deployed in a final push by the party to prevent its supporters being won over by the Scottish National Party.

With polls suggesting a late swing towards the Yes camp, Mr Brown urged voters not to ‘abandon’ the huge value to Scotland of pooling resources with the rest of the UK in areas such as pensions and healthcare.

He told an audience of activists and politicians at Westminster that he had asked Speaker John Bercow to allow him to lead a debate when the Commons resumes business in October to galvanise cross-party support for reforms.

A pledge of extra tax and legal powers for Holyrood in the event of a rejection of independence in the popular vote has been signed by the leaders of all three main Westminster parties.

Read more here:

Former PM Gordon Brown says health service is too vital to throw away its future for independence, Daily Record

GORDON Brown says we must continue to share costs of health care and welfare with rest of the union - or pay the price.

WHY should the people of Scotland throw away a system that we helped create, a system that benefits us greatly to this day?

This question is particularly important when it is often a matter of life and death.

Our NHS is worth £176 a month to every single Scottish man, woman and child.

That is £17 a month more than the £159 that the NHS spends on patients in England and £13 per month more than the £163 it spends on patients in Wales.

It means that over a whole year, £200 more is spent on the health care of each of us in Scotland than on our English neighbours.

But the funding of our NHS in Scotland comes not just from money raised in Scotland by taxes levied here. It comes from money raised from all over the UK by taxes paid by every UK citizen.

Overall, Scotland receives around £950million more for health care than any division of resources based on population share would provide, and for very good reasons.

With more elderly people, more people with disabilities and a wider geographical area to cover, Scottish needs are greater and the share out of resources arises from the founding principle of the NHS which is the best there could be: you pay in based on your ability to pay and you benefit based on your need.

Read the full article here:

Cameron accuses Salmond of being 'desperate' after claims independence will protect the NHS from privatisation Daily Mail.

  The Prime Minister said health is already devolved to Holyrood

  Mr Salmond said NHS cuts in England would be replicated in Scotland

  Scottish Government's spending on private contractors has risen by 25%

David Cameron has accused the First Minister of ‘desperate’ tactics over his claim that separation will protect the NHS from privatisation.

The Prime Minister stressed health is devolved to Holyrood and controversial changes at Westminster cannot be imposed on Scots.

Alex Salmond, who went green bowling in Arbroath with Scotland's Commonwealth medallists today, has argued that NHS budget cuts south of the border would be replicated in Scotland – despite the fact Holyrood has received an extra £1.3billion from Westminster over five years.

He has persisted with the argument despite claims of hypocrisy after it emerged the Scottish Government’s own spending on private contractors rose by almost a quarter last year to more than £80million.

Mr Cameron said: ‘Health is a devolved issue. So the only person who could, if they wanted to, introduce more private provision into the NHS in Scotland is Alex Salmond.

‘I think this is a desperate man recognising the argument is going away from him making a pretty desperate argument.

‘Actually because of the protection on NHS spending that the UK Government has given that we would not cut NHS spending while we have had to make difficult decisions elsewhere - that has actually made sure under the Barnett formula that money is available for Scotland as well.‘So I think that argument does not stack up at all.’

Read more here:

Scottish Independence essay: Nordic model a fantasy, The Scotsman, Updated, SNP Government Oil and Gas Figures, spectacularly wrong

ADRIAN Wooldridge says there is no evidence the Nordic countries want to engage with Scotland

THE STORY is all too familiar. The marriage grows stale with the years. Those charming idiosyncrasies become intolerable irritations. The unhappy husband or wife catches the eye of a comely stranger. A glance turns into an affair. After a lot of rowing the unhappy couple finally divorces and life begins again.

This is half the story of the possible divorce between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom: a significant number of Scots think they would be much happier with the comely Nordics than with the dowdy English. But the other half of the story is more complicated. The Nordics show no sign of reciprocating the suitor’s affections. And the Nordic model that the nationalists have fallen in love with disappeared 25 years ago.

Evidence of the affair can be found all over the place. The Scottish National Party cannot get enough of the Nordic model. The Nordic model is not only vastly superior to the English model – it provides people with a higher standard of living while guaranteeing a safety net that is so generous that fathers get a year’s worth of paternity leave. It is also more in tune with Scotland’s collectivist and egalitarian tradition. The Jimmy Reid Foundation argues that the Scottish idea of the Common Wealth is the local equivalent of the Nordic ideal of the “folkhemmet” or People’s Home. Lesley Riddoch, a columnist on this paper, has established a thinktank, Nordic Horizons, to push for closer links between the Holyrood parliament and its northern neighbours. Angus Robertson, the SNP’s spokesman on foreign affairs and one of its leading Nordo-philes, says that one of the first things an independent Scotland will do will be to apply to join the Nordic Council, a steering group of Nordic countries.

Scotland’s infatuation with the Nordic model is not hard to understand. The Nordic countries routinely come at or close to the top of every official measure of success, from economic success to social wellbeing. It is common to argue that countries face a trade-off between economic growth and quality of life. The Nordic countries show that it is possible to have the best of both worlds.

Scotland and the Nordics are also drawn together by powerful ties of culture. Some ties are direct and genetic: the Viking raiders of the early Middle Ages left a profound mark on the country. The Shetland islanders still burn a Viking longboat every year. The language is littered with Scandinavian words. Other ties are cultural and geographic. Both Scotland and the Nordics are profoundly shaped by the Protestant religion and a frequently challenging climate and geography (asked to list his nearest railway station on a parliamentary expense form Jo Grimond replied “Bergen, Norway”).

Both the Scots and the Nordics lead the world in extracting natural resources. Both have a marked taste for the grain and the hop. And both excel in producing the modern equivalent of Viking sagas. Henning Mankel’s Inspector Wallender and Ian Rankin’s Inspector Rebus are cut from the same cloth: brooding individualists determined to get to the bottom of the blood-soaked story whatever the higher-ups tell them.

There are all sorts of obvious problems with this Scandimania. The Vikings left a more profound imprint on Northumbria, Cumbria and Yorkshire than on Scotland. Scotland’s west coast is more Irish than Scandinavian. Denmark and Southern Sweden look more like East Anglia than they do the Scottish Lowlands, let alone the Highlands.

Read more here:

Further Reading:

Alex Salmond’s currency dilemma: Climbdown or lose

Daily question: How big is Scotland’s economy and what's important to it?

Empire shadow still hangs heavy over Scotland

Scots Are Divided Over Independence, and Its Economic Costs

Oil forecast 'spectacularly wrong'

Beyond the Scottish Independence Question, Looking at a Greater Devolution in The United Kingdom, A Perspective