Issue Number 2

20/05/2014

Headlines:

‘Scotland would

qualify for their

highest economic

assessment, the AAA

credit rating, even

without the boon of

North Sea Oil.’

-Richard Lovell

Emily Ingram pro-

vides a detailed anal-

ysis of each party’s

EU election manifes-

to.

Scottish Youth Par-

liament member for

Edinburgh East, As-

sad Khan, gives his

reasons for backing a

Yes vote in Septem-

ber.

Robin Drummond

gives a blow-by-blow

account of Jim

Eadie’s debate with

Better Together’s

Alistair Darling.

Calum Martin anal-

yses the housing cri-

sis, and breaks down

several of the key

numbers involved.

And Kevin Brown on

the chances that in-

dependence offers.

Editor’s Note

After a fantastic re-

ception to May

Day’s launch issue, I

am thrilled to wel-

come you all to issue

number two of In

the Garden of Edin.

We have had over

ten thousand indi-

vidual hits on the

Facebook page since

first publishing

twenty days ago. So

a massive thank you

to everyone that has

shared the page,

downloaded issue

one, or ‘liked’ the

page.

I’ve organised the

first of my ‘Visions

of Independence’

lecture series which

will be taking place

this Friday 23rd

May

at the George

Square Theatre, Ed-

inburgh University

central. Speakers

confirmed are Robin

McAlpine of the

Reid Foundation,

Edinburgh East

member for the

Scottish Youth Par-

liament and Youth

Officer for Scots-

Asians for Inde-

pendence Assad

Khan, co-founder of

Women for Inde-

pendence Kate Hig-

gins, Sarah Beattie

Smith of the Radical

Independence Cam-

paign, and activist

Zareen Taj who will

be speaking as an

individual. The lec-

ture is all free to at-

tend, will start sharp

at 17:00, and is open

to all members of

the public. After the

discussion draws to

a close we will head

to a nearby pub.

Please see our Face-

book page for fur-

ther details.

In just two days’

time we will see the

EU elections take

place, and as I touch

on when quote Sa-

rah Beattie - Smith’s

speech at the latest

RIC meeting, Edin-

burgh, the results

will give an indica-

tion of how this ref-

erendum is shaping

up. If the SNP man-

age to get a third

MEP candidate

elected, and Maggie

Chapman of the

Greens manages to

get in too, then we

will have four pro-

independence MEPs

elected in Scotland.

As always get in

touch if you have

any comments, sug-

gestions, or critiques

for issue three.

Yours for Scotland,

Luke Campbell

@lukecampbell6

Editor: Emily Ingram

provides a very

comprehensive

guide to the mani-

festos being offered

by each of the par-

ties standing in

Scotland for Thurs-

day’s E.U. elections. I

cannot thank her

enough for the

enough of time and

effort that she has

put into this piece.

------------------------

Emily has analysed

the parties based on

the following crite-

ria:

Economic Policy,

European Policy,

Immigration Policy,

Environmental, and

Crime

SNP

Economics: The SNP

values the member-

ship of the EU as it

believes it allows

Scotland and the UK

to participate more

easily in world trade

discussions. The

European single

market is highly

praised by the SNP

in their European

manifesto whilst the

need for reform of

the restrictions

placed on businesses

is also emphasised.

The importance of

good transport links

in order to aid the

free movement of

people and goods

throughout the EU is

emphasised. The

elimination of mo-

bile phone roaming

charges is also sup-

ported by the SNP.

Europe: In their

manifesto the SNP

declare themselves

to be ‘unashamedly,

though not uncriti-

cally’ pro-EU and

call for stricter

budget discipline

within EU projects

and the elimination

of bureacracy. In

the event of a Yes

vote, the SNP would

seek to join the EU

as an independent

country.

Agriculture & Fish-

ing: Further reform

of the Common

Fisheries Policy is

prioritised by the

SNP, which wishes

to see EU member

states regain power

over who is able to

fish in their waters.

The SNP would like

to see the Common

Agricultural Policy

become more flexi-

ble in order to bet-

ter represent the

diverse nature of

farmland across the

EU.

Currency: The SNP

favour the pound

sterling as the cur-

rency of an Inde-

pendent Scotland.

Immigration: The

SNP would like the

EU to insist that ref-

ugees receive the

same treatment in

all of its member

states. The SNP

suggest in their

manifesto that, were

Scotland to gain in-

dependence from

the UK, the country

would be made

open to a larger

number of immi-

grants.

Environment: The

SNP would like to

see the EU introduce

more ambitious en-

vironmental protec-

tion laws but allow

greater flexibility in

target-setting. The

SNP intend to cam-

paign for the EU to

invest in the devel-

opment of sustaina-

ble energy sources.

Crime: The SNP

supports the Euro-

pean Arrest War-

rant.

Social: The SNP be-

lieve that the EU

should encourage its

member states to

invest in organisa-

tions and industries

which showcase

their individual cul-

tures and heritage.

Workplace: The SNP

supports the im-

portance placed by

the EU on workers’

rights and calls for

mandatory living

wage for those

working on public

contracts.

------------------------

The SNP MEP candi-

dates are Ian

Hudghton, Alyn

Smith, Tasmina Ah-

med-Sheikh, Ste-

phen Getins, Toni

Giugliano, Chris Ste-

phens

------------------------

Conservatives:

Economics: The EU’s

trade negotiations

with Japan, China

and the US are

viewed positively

and the Conserva-

tives hope to use

negotiations to se-

cure better deals for

UK businesses.

Europe: The Scottish

Conservatives would

limit the power the

EU has to influence

UK governments

and support the cur-

rent government’s

call for a referen-

dum on the UK’s

membership of the

EU in 2017.

Agriculture & Fish-

ing: The Conserva-

tives oppose the

throwing back of

edible fish into the

seas. They say they

would like to give

local people more

say on how the fish-

ing industry in run

and win powers over

fishing back from

Brussels. The Con-

servatives believe

that the Common

Agricultural Policy is

detrimental to

farmers and involves

too much bureau-

cracy and wish to

see the Policy re-

formed.

Currency : The Con-

servatives are anti-

Euro.

Immigration: The

Conservatives aim to

reduce the number

of immigrants arriv-

ing in the UK and

limit the access that

immigrants have to

benefits.

Environment: The

Scottish Conserva-

tives state in their

manifesto that they

hope to work to cut

carbon emissions

across Europe. They

intend to freeze the

rate of tax imposed

on fossil fuels at its

current level and

intend to campaign

to prevent the EU’s

2030 renewable en-

ergy targets from

being unwillingly

imposed on its

member states.

Crime: The Con-

servatives are anti-

EU interference with

policing laws and

wish to undertake a

‘radical reform’ of

human rights laws

which would involve

limiting the role of

the European Court

of Human Rights in

UK affairs. If Britain

were to opt back

into the European

Arrest Warrant, the

Conservatives would

aim to prevent Brit-

ish citizens for being

extraditing for acts

that are not illegal in

the UK.

------------------------

The Conservative

MEP candidates are

Ian Duncan, Belinda

Don, Nosheena Mo-

barik, Jamie Gardi-

ner, Iain McGill, Stu-

art McIntyre

------------------------

Greens:

Economics: If elect-

ed, the Greens will

call for the EU to

support industries

and transactions

which promote sus-

tainability and

workers’ rights.

They would call for

GDP to be replaced

with a scale which

gives a better indi-

cation of the well-

being of a nation’s

inhabitants. Local,

co-operative ven-

tures would be sup-

ported whilst calls

would be made to

end high-risk finan-

cial speculation by

large businesses.

The Greens also wish

to see the EU do

more to abolish tax

havens and thus

prevent tax evasion

and would see a

more progressive

taxation system put

in place. Blanket

austerity cuts which

affect the public

sector are opposed.

The Greens support

the phasing out of

European VAT which

they feel has a nega-

tive impact on low-

income households

and wish to see the

tax replaced with a

minimum corporate

tax, to avoid excess

competition be-

tween countries

hoping to attract

foreign investors.

The Greens would

like the EU to work

with other global

organisations to

create a system for

reviewing and can-

celling unsustaina-

ble third world debt.

Europe: In their

manifesto, the

Greens cite the EU as

being important to

UK businesses and

the combatting of

climate change.

Agriculture & Fish-

ing: The Greens

would like the EU to

promote types of

agriculture that en-

courage bees and

other pollinators.

The Greens believe

the Common Agri-

cultural Policy

should include

measures that pre-

vent farmers from

flooding others

downstream. The

Greens would like to

see the discarding of

edible fish banned

and new regulations

should be intro-

duced to prevent

overfishing.

Currency: The

Greens support an

Independent Scot-

land’s right to use

the pound sterling

but would campaign

for Scotland to de-

velop its own cur-

rency over time.

They are opposed to

the Euro as they be-

lieve it is not sensi-

tive to local eco-

nomic fluctuations

and needs.

Immigration: Free

movement and im-

migration across the

EU is supported

along with an ex-

pansion in the inter-

national legal defini-

tion of refugee sta-

tus.

Environment: The

Greens would like to

see the EU scrap the

Climate Change Levy

- which taxes busi-

nesses, local admin-

istrations, etc. for

their energy con-

sumption – and re-

place with a carbon

tax which applies to

all fossil fuels,

whether they are

destined for com-

mercial or domestic

use. Where produc-

tion of biofuel com-

petes with food

production, food

should be priori-

tised.

Crime: Crimes such

as tax evasion

should be given

more priority by Eu-

ropol.

Defence: The Greens

would like to see all

EU member states

abandon their nu-

clear weapons and

be prevented from

selling military

technology to coun-

tries or organisa-

tions that are

deemed to be op-

pressive.

------------------------

The Green MEP can-

didates are Maggie

Chapman, Chas

Booth, Alis Balance,

Alastair Whitelaw,

Grace Murray, Steen

Parish

------------------------

Labour

Economics: Labour

supports the contin-

uation of the EU’s

internal market and,

through it, wishes to

negotiate better

prices and new op-

portunities for UK

businesses.

Europe: Labour see

the EU as a vital tool

for economic and

environmental

change but plan to

call for reforms to

make the Union’s

committees and

work more trans-

parent.

Agriculture & Fish-

ing: Labour want the

Common Agricul-

ture Policy to be re-

formed.

Currency: In their

manifesto, Labour

claim to be in favour

of a single European

currency in theory

but state that they

would only support

joining the Euro if

they felt it to be in

Britain’s interests.

They promise to re-

view whether this is

the case in future

Budgets.

Immigration: Labour

wants the UK to re-

tain the power to

control its borders

and immigration

levels.

Environment: La-

bour hopes to use

the EU’s low-carbon

policies as a way of

creating new jobs.

Crime: Labour aims

to continue to share

intelligence with

other member states

to combat interna-

tional crime. Labour

supports the Euro-

pean Arrest War-

rant.

Workplace: Labour

hope to campaign to

ensure that good

workplace health

and safety policy,

along with fair

working hours and

holidays, are made

universal in all of

the EU’s member

states

------------------------

The Labour MEP

candidates are David

Martin, Catherine

Atihlen, Derek

Munn, Katrina Mur-

ray, Nasim Khan,

Kirsty O'Brien

------------------------

Lib Dems:

Economics: The Lib

Dems would like to

see the EU reduce

the number of trade

barriers it places on

its member states

and ensure ‘red

tape’ bureaucracy

does not apply to

smaller businesses.

They also wish to

promote smaller

businesses’ access to

EU funding and are

supportive of the

development an

‘easy-to-use’ EU

guide for such busi-

nesses. The party

strongly supports

the EU’s trade nego-

tiations with devel-

oping nations and

Japan and America.

They would like the

financial sectors of

the EU’s member

states to be more

regulated. The Lib

Dems would like to

abolish mobile

phone roaming

charges. Further

devolution of agri-

cultural policy to

individual member

states in supported.

Europe: The Lib

Dems are in favour

of the UK’s contin-

ued membership of

the EU but would

support a referen-

dum on EU member-

ship if any further

significant powers

are transferred to

Brussels, while con-

tinuing to campaign

for the UK to remain

a part of the Union.

Agriculture & Fish-

ing: The Lib Dems

would like the EU to

fund research into

more sustainable

farming practises

and prohibit the dis-

carding of edible

fish.

Immigration: The

Lib Dems support

free movement

within the UK but

would like the Ha-

bitual Residence

Test to be stricter

and are calling on

the EU to extend the

period of time in

which those newly

arrived and unem-

ployed in an EU

country must rely on

the benefits system

of their country of

origin from 3 to 6

months. The inclu-

sion of a nationality

check on the Univer-

sal Credit claiming

form is supported.

Environment: The

Lib Dems are calling

for the EU to invest

more widely in low-

carbon technology.

They support the

creation of a Euro-

pean Supergrid and

would like all EU

member states to

pledge to reduce

their carbon emis-

sions by 50% before

2030. They would

like the EU to create

tighter emissions

standards for all ve-

hicles. Where pro-

duction of biofuel

competes with food

production, food

should be priori-

tised. Development

aid should be with-

drawn from envi-

ronmentally harmful

projects.

Crime: The Lib Dems

support the EU-wide

extradition laws.

They would like an

EU missing child

alert system to be

created so efforts to

search for missing

children can be

more readily co-

ordinated on an in-

ternational scale.

The creation of an

EU unidentified bod-

ies database is also

supported. The Lib

Dems would cam-

paign to see the EU’s

Criminal Record In-

formation System

extended. They are

in favour of ‘Euro-

Bail’ which allows

EU citizens to serve

their bail in their

home country and

would like the UK to

rejoin a EU scheme

which allows its citi-

zens to serve non-

custodial sentences

in Britain.

Workplace: The Lib

Dems wants to

amend the Working

Time Directive

which gives workers

in EU countries the

right to a minimum

amount of holiday,

rest and breaks and

supports the UK’s

opt-out of the 48-

hour week.

Defence: Military

capabilities should

continue to be

pooled with assis-

tance from organi-

sations such as

NATO. The Lib

Dems would like an

EU-wide policy on

Russia and China to

be developed.

------------------------

The Liberal Demo-

crat MEP candidates

are George Lyon,

Christine Jardine,

Lisa Strachan, Rich-

ard Brodie, Jade

Holden, Euan Da-

vidson

------------------------

UKIP

Economics: UKIP

oppose all of the

EU’s regulations

which apply to busi-

nesses and states

that they are too

restrictive and bu-

reaucratic.

Europe: UKIP would

like to see the UK

retract its member-

ship of the EU.

Agriculture & Fish-

ing: UKIP is against

other EU member

states being permit-

ted to fish in UK wa-

ters.

Currency: UKIP are

anti-Euro.

Immigration: UKIP

believe that the EU’s

free movement of

people policy has

brought about over-

crowding of schools

and hospitals and

that mass immigra-

tion has coincided

with periods of ris-

ing unemployment.

Environment: UKIP

opposes the EU’s

renewable energy

targets as they be-

lieve the targets to

involve unnecessary

diversion of taxpay-

ers’ money away

from projects within

the UK. They are

against the EU Large

Combustion Plant

Directive’s staged

closure of coal-fired

power stations.

UKIP would like to

reduce the taxes

currently imposed

on fossil fuels and

reduce the differ-

ence in price be-

tween petrol and

diesel.

Crime: UKIP opposes

the European Court

of Human Right’s

legislation which

allows prisoners to

vote and oppose any

interference in UK

affairs by the Court.

------------------------

The UKIP MEP can-

didates are David

Coburn, Otto Inglis,

Kevin Neuter, Den-

ise Baykal, Hugh

Hatrick, Malcom

Mackay

------------------------

United in Europe

Economics: UIE

would like to see

further reduction of

trade barriers by the

EU.

Europe: United in

Europe support the

UK’s continued

membership of the

EU and would like to

see the UK take a

more active role in

the EU’s decision-

making processes in

order to champion

British interests.

Agriculture & Fish-

ing: In their mani-

festo, UIE praise the

subsidies that the EU

grants to farmers.

Immigration: The

EU’s free movement

policy is supported

by UIE.

Environment: UIE

support the contin-

uation of the EU’s

environmental pro-

tection policies.

Workplace: UIE sup-

port EU legislation

which promotes

workers’ rights.

------------------------

The U.I.E. MEP can-

didates are Ferdi-

nand Goetzen, Claire

Thomson.

------------------------

Still not sure who to

vote for? Vote

Match

(www.votematch.or

g.uk/) analyses your

response to 30 polit-

ical statements to

determine which

party corresponds

most with your

opinions.

Emily Ingram

@Emily_IngramS

_______________________

Independence by

Numbers

Can Scotland afford

to go it alone? This

has been the ques-

tion at the centre of

the referendum de-

bate so far with

economics proving a

key battleground for

both campaigns in

their attempts to

win over undecided

voters. However,

the figures show

that an independent

Scotland’s economic

outlook would be

remarkably bright.

Scotland has strong

public finances; the

latest GERS figures

show that Scotland

raised £800 more in

tax per person over

the UK average in

the last financial

year. So whilst the

No campaign is cor-

rect when they say

Scotland receives

higher public spend-

ing per head than

the UK average it is

vitally important to

remember that we

generate more than

that figure in tax.

The GERS report al-

so highlights that

had Scotland been

an independent

country already it

would have been

better off over the

last 5 years to the

tune of £8.3 billion.

Looking even fur-

ther back, over the

past 33 years, this

trend continues and

we find Scotland

would have had a

cash surplus of £50

billion and no public

debt had it been in-

dependent during

this time.

Continuing this out-

look a recent Finan-

cial Times article

concluded that an

Independent Scot-

land would expect

to start off life with

healthier finances

than the remainder

of the UK. It stated;

“Scotland’s GDP per

head is bigger than

that of France. Even

excluding the North

Sea’s hydrocarbon

bounty, per capita

GDP is higher than

that of Italy. Oil,

whisky and a broad

range of manufac-

tured goods mean

an independent

Scotland would be

one of the world’s

top 35 exporters.”

Credit rating agency

Standard and Poor’s

have also declared

that an independent

Scotland would

qualify for their

highest economic

assessment, the AAA

credit rating, even

without the boon of

North Sea Oil. They

cited Scotland’s di-

verse economy, var-

ied tax base, strong

balance of payments

and high GDP per

capita as reasons for

this assessment.

Scotland’s oil and

gas will continue to

be an important sec-

tor of the Scottish

economy after inde-

pendence and with

15-24 billion barrels

of oil still to be ex-

tracted production

will continue well

into the 21st centu-

ry. Importantly, in-

dependence will

provide Scotland

with the opportunity

to create an oil sav-

ings fund similar to

that of Norway’s

(which’s value cur-

rently sits at $850

billion) to ensure

that our nations vast

oil wealth will last

well after the oil has

run out and can

benefit future gen-

erations as much as

the present.

On the much talked

about issue of cur-

rency an independ-

ent Scotland has a

range of currency

options at its dis-

posal; continuing to

use Sterling, a Scot-

tish currency

pegged to Sterling

or a fully flexible

Scottish currency.

All of these options

have positives and

negatives attached

but the Scottish

Governments fa-

vours using Sterling

in a formal currency

union with the re-

mainder of the UK.

They argue that this

would be in the best

interests of both

parties in the imme-

diate aftermath of

Independence but

the UK Government

has rejected this

proposal. However,

as highlighted by a

recent article in The

Guardian, they are

clearly bluffing by

rejecting this pro-

posal, the transac-

tion cost to busi-

nesses from the re-

mainder of the UK

would be huge and

without Scotland’s

exports the UK

would suffer from a

large drop in its bal-

ance of Payments.

Also, there would be

no way of stopping

an Independent

Scotland from using

Sterling informally

because it is a fully

tradable interna-

tional currency.

However, when it

comes to the eco-

nomics of inde-

pendence the cur-

rency we use won’t

matter anywhere

near as much as the

ability to make all of

our important eco-

nomic decisions

here in Scotland.

Independence will

ensure that the

Scottish Govern-

ment has full tax

raising powers, ra-

ther than the cur-

rent 7% reserved to

Holyrood, and that

they can use a full

array of economic

levers to harness

Scotland’s wealth in

order to increase

investment, grow

the tax base and

begin to tackle the

countries’ social

problems more ef-

fectively. After in-

dependence Scot-

land can cease to

simply replicate the

failing economic

structure of the UK

which has allowed

us to become the

4th most unequal

country in the de-

veloped world and

where the rich are

allowed to prosper

year upon year at

the expense of eve-

ryone else. Instead,

we can use the op-

portunities of inde-

pendence to create

an economic struc-

ture that functions

more efficiently and

distributes wealth

more evenly

throughout society

rather than just to

the elite.

Perhaps we should

begin to question

not whether Scot-

land can afford to

be independent, as

it undoubtedly can;

we should ask if we

can afford to remain

a part of the UK.

Despite Scotland’s

healthy financial

figures it faces a

number of costs

placed on it through

its association with

Westminster. Scot-

land faces the pro-

spect of paying for a

debt it would not

have ran up if it

were independent.

We had to pay £4.02

billion in debt inter-

est to Westminster

last year and in total

servicing this inter-

est has cost the

country £68.12 bil-

lion. Scotland’s

economic figures

also take into ac-

count spending out-

side of Scotland in-

cluding substantial

military costs, nu-

clear submarines on

the Clyde, HS2 and

the unelected House

of Lords – all of

which an independ-

ent Scotland simply

wouldn’t need and

amount to savings

of over £1 billion

per year.

When we go to the

polling station on

the 18th of Septem-

ber we should vote

with our heads and

our hearts to decide

what’s best for Scot-

land’s future. How-

ever when we’re

making our decision

no one should be

afraid of the eco-

nomics of inde-

pendence, the num-

bers do add up to a

wealthy Scotland.

Richard Lovell

_______________________

RIC Meeting, Mon-

day 12th

May 2014

St. Augustine’s

Church

Luke Campbell

@lukecampbell6

For their meeting on

Monday 12th

May,

RIC Edinburgh

branch invited Sarah

Beattie – Smith of

the Green Party to

speak about the up-

coming European

elections. Sarah

stated that ‘every

European election

has a media spin on

it. In 2009 it was the

Westminster elec-

tions scandal. In

2004 it was Rory

Kilrory-Silk. This

election whether we

like it or not, is the

UKIP election. The

media has decided

that.’ She talked of

how 22nd

May is a

chance to get the

first Scottish Green

MEP elected, rein-

forcing the lead

Green candidate

Maggie Chapman’s

stance as a Socialist

and a feminist,

whilst reminding the

attendees that Mag-

gie herself is an im-

migrant who has

made Scotland her

home. Sarah rein-

forced the Green’s

three ideals – ‘Vote

Green for a fair and

just Scotland; Vote

Green for a welcom-

ing Scotland that

rejects UKIP’s notion

that we can blame

everything on mi-

grant workers; and

Vote Green for na-

tion of peace’, add-

ing that the Green

Party ares deter-

mined to rid Scot-

land of Trident. Sa-

rah closed by stating

that the EU elections

are a real opportuni-

ty to set in motion a

wave ahead of the

referendum in Sep-

tember.

E.U. Elections

The European elec-

tions in Scotland are

going to be damn

close this time

round. As much as I

truly hope Maggie

Chapman gets in for

the Green Party, I’ll

be casting my vote

for the SNP in the

hope of getting

Tasmina Ahmed-

Shek into Brussels. I

want to see a Green

MEP sitting along-

side three SNP

MEPs, but nothing is

certain, and with the

polls demonstrating

just how tight this is

going to be, I feel

that getting a third

SNP candidate

elected is the most

likely way of ensur-

ing that neither

UKIP nor the Tories

get in. I know a

large number of

people that are go-

ing to be voting

Green, and I will be

thrilled if we see

Alyn Smith, Ian

Hudgton, Tasmina

Ahmed- Sheikh and

Maggie Chapman

represent us in Brus-

sels.

Luke Campbell

------------------------

We asked twenty

students in Edin-

burgh to give their

predictions for the

upcoming EU elec-

tions on 22nd

May:

Luke Campbell, 2nd

Year -3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Green

Ivan Januskevic 2nd

Year – 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Green

David Aitchison, 2nd

Year – 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Conservative

Lucas McGregor-

Paas, 2nd

Year – 4

SNP, 2 Labour

Robin Drummond,

2nd

Year – 2 SNP, 2

Labour, 1 Green, 1

Conservative

Magnus Jamieson,

4th

Year – 3 SNP, 2

Labour, 1 Conserva-

tive

Calum Martin, 2nd

Year – 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Conservative

Angus Nicoll, 1st

Year – 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Conservative

Charles Lang, 1st

Year, 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Green

Amie Robertson, 3rd

Year – 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Green

Fraser Dick, 4th

Year

– 3 SNP, 2 Labour, 1

Conservative

Calum Winter – 3

SNP, 2 Labour, 1

Conservative

Jonny Ross-Tatam,

2nd

Year – 3 Labour,

2 SNP, 1 Green

David Kelly, 2nd

Year

– 3 SNP, 2 Labour, 1

Conservative

Andrew Dove, 3rd

Year, 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Conservative

James Puchowski, 1st

Year – 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Green

Dash Sekhar, 4th

Year – 2 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Green, 1

Conservative

Kevin Brown, 4th

Year - 3 SNP, 2 La-

bour, 1 Green

Joseph L. Reid, First

Year – 3 SNP, 2 Lab,

1 Tory

Average result pre-

dicted by our partic-

ipants = 3 SNP, 2

Labour, 1 Conserva-

tive, with the Green

just pipped to a

seat.

_______________________

Sunday Herald de-

clares its support for

a YES vote

Luke Campbell

@lukecampbell6

An article on the

newspaper's website

said: ‘The Herald &

Times Group, pub-

lisher of the Sunday

Herald, The Herald

and the Evening

Times, is giving the

titles' editors free-

dom to take their

own editorial posi-

tion on the constitu-

tion. The company is

non-political and

neutral.

‘The Herald has not

declared an opinion

on the referendum

question. It will be

up to its editor to

decide when, and if,

to do so.’

You can read the

article in full here:

http://www.heraldsc

ot-

land.com/comment/

sunday-herald-

view/the-prize-is-a-

better-country-it-is-

as-simple-as-that-

why-the-sunday-

hera.24133829

_______________________

‘Yes in 100 Words or

Less’

We invited our

readers to submit

their reasons for

voting yes in as

close to one hun-

dred words as pos-

sible. Want to see

your reasons in issue

three? Contact Luke

at

luke.gardenofedin20

14@gmail.com

_______________________

Democracy.

Yes, we do live in

one now, but inde-

pendence greatly

improves our stake,

our voice, our re-

sponsibility and our

accountability.

Our votes will count

for more and will

result in parliaments

and governments

more representative

of what all the citi-

zens in Scotland

want and need.

It's nothing to do

with geography or

history.

It's not about

whether I consider

myself to be Scot-

tish, British or both.

Frankly, I couldn't

care less about that.

It's to do with seiz-

ing this one chance

we have to start

building a dynamic

democracy that is fit

for purpose in this

21st century world

we live in.

Andy Connelly-

Nimmo (Andy runs

Scottish Independ-

ence 2014 page on

Facebook with over

3,500 people regu-

larly seeing the con-

tent that he posts

around the referen-

dum)

_______________________

My support for

Scottish independ-

ence has been book

marked by two

Margarets -

Margaret Thatcher,

and my Aunt Marga-

ret. The first taught

me that I was a sec-

ond class citizen in

my own country, a

country which was

good for nothing

but being the play

park of the rich. The

second showed me,

through her belief in

independence, that

there was another

way.

My reason for vot-

ing yes has always

been very straight-

forward – it is a mat-

ter of self - determi-

nation. The best

people to run Scot-

land are the people

of Scotland. It really

is that simple.

Seonaid Francis, Di-

rector ThunderPoint

Publishing

_______________________

"Independence, for

me, offers a true

departure from the

status quo. Devolu-

tion offers a water-

ing down of existing

grievances with the

British political sys-

tem and will only

grow tensions be-

tween the British

member states. The

rise of isolationist

parties like UKIP

within rUK politics

has transformed the

movement of inde-

pendence from na-

tionalism into inter-

nationalism. While

the rUK turns away

from Europe, Scot-

land demands fur-

ther dialogue to en-

sure proper repre-

sentation of Scottish

interests. With inde-

pendence, proper

representation is

possible. In Europe,

in the United Na-

tions, in its own fi-

nances and politics.

The risk lies in refus-

ing to leave the

sinking boat."

- Joseph L.

Reid

See Joseph’s first

contribution to Na-

tional Collective

here:

http://nationalcollec

tive.com/2014/05/1

4/what-yes-means-

to-me-reform-

democracy-identity/

_______________________

Democratically, lm

voting for inde-

pendence, so l feel

my vote is valid and

Scotland elect a

government they

voted for.

lm voting inde-

pendence, to make

sure my son has a

decent future.

Westminster takes

care of itself with

jobs, finance, enter-

prise, wealth and

political power.

l am voting inde-

pendence, because l

believe that right

wing ideology has

no place in Scottish

politics. Evident in

the fact that Scot-

land has only one

Tory M.P. Yet, Scot-

land is subject to

horrendous social

policies. Where the

vulnerable and mar-

ginalised are penal-

ised for the mistakes

of the financial mar-

kets of neo liberal

policy. The people

of Scotland have a

social conscience.

Like myself,they

want a fairer, more

equal society to live

in.

Scotland has the

potential, the re-

sources, the skill and

desire to deliver in-

dependence to its

people.

- Shirley Wat-

son

_______________________

As a 17-year-old I’ve

found it hard to find

a political party or

movement that has

really inspired me to

get into politics, as I

think is the problem

with a LOT of teen-

agers in Britain.

However, the one

movement that has

truly caught my at-

tention has been the

Yes campaign, it is

positive and truthful

and what it offers is

truly exciting. An

independent Scot-

land gives us ac-

countability, the

most fundamental

components of a

democracy and one

that we in Scotland

are currently denied.

It would truly be a

travesty to be de-

prived of this any

longer. Vote Yes.

- Paddy Wil-

liams

_______________________

"Being a disillu-

sioned lifelong La-

bour voter who pet-

ulantly voted

LibDem for the first

time at the 2010

general election,

and subsequently

bitterly regretting

even that small act

of defiance as I

watched Clegg help

install and prop up a

Tory government,

my “journey to yes”

was somewhat bit-

ter. With no major

party left to vote for

UK politics just felt

unfair and broken,

especially looking at

that Scotland results

map with its one

small single spot of

blue. I’m 100% yes

for so many differ-

ent reasons now,

but first amongst

them was that Scot-

land deserves the

government it votes

for."

- James

Whyte

_______________________

When I was young,

Scots language was

regarded as "com-

mon", our glorious

history of invention

was seen as a "thing

of the past", the on-

ly hope was emigra-

tion. Our heavy in-

dustry was closed

with no alternative

in place to shatter a

class unity that was

inconvenient for

Westminster. A nip

inside us at a Scot-

land game, the frus-

tration of being a

disenfranchised Scot

would surface and

find appropriate ex-

pression; most of

the time it was si-

lenced by our own

internalised oppres-

sor. Now we have a

vote that counts.

Now we have hope.

Soon we'll have a

country. SAOR AL-

BA!

- Bob Leslie

_______________________

Chris Jack talks of a

new kind of politics

I cannot recount all

of the reasons I am

voting Yes in this

short space, there

are simply too

many! So I will focus

on the two most im-

portant areas for

me.

First off, I think that

small is beautiful

when it comes to

government. I be-

lieve that independ-

ence will lead to

Scotland being gov-

erned in the inter-

ests of the people by

a government that is

closer and more ac-

countable, while

eliminating forever

the democratic defi-

cit we have suffered

for over 50 years.

Furthermore, I hope

that independence

will lead to further

decentralisation of

power, the

strengthening of

local democracy and

increased political

participation.

Secondly, I lean to

the left politically

and the current

dominance of right

wing politics is of

great concern to me.

I feel that it is im-

portant to balance

the political right

and left and that

there is no prospect

of that balance be-

ing restored anytime

soon in the UK.

Therefore, I am ex-

cited by the obvious

national and politi-

cal revival that is

taking place in Scot-

land as a result of

the referendum,

with movements

such as the Common

Weal bringing a

breath of fresh air

and heralding the

dawn of a new kind

of politics.

- Chris Jack

_______________________

There are many rea-

sons as to why I'm

voting yes, the main

reason is that a yes

vote in September

will ensure that

Scotland becomes

more greener and

an unwarlike nation.

The current de-

volved powers in the

Scottish parliament

are restricted to say

much in this regard

so voting yes will

enable Scotland to

be in charge of how

to make our society

greener. Independ-

ence will allow Scot-

land talk more freely

when talking with

other countries as a

member of interna-

tional environmen-

tal institutions. Scot-

land being an inde-

pendent country

also gives us the

opportunity to re-

move weapons of

mass destruction.

Nuclear weapons are

immoral, extremely

expensive and are

useless in terms of

protecting us

against the most

significant threats to

our national securi-

ty. Scotland must

lead by example and

get rid of trident as

we should be invest-

ing in ‘bairns not

bombs’. Not only

will we look good in

the eyes of the

world but we will

also be gaining a lot

of money which we

can spend on social

and environmental

alternatives.

- Assad Khan

(Assad is the elected

member of the Scot-

tish Youth Parlia-

ment for Edinburgh

East)

_______________________

Independence won't

guarantee anything

but it does give us

the chance for

change we don't

have in the UK. Al-

most everyone on

the front bench of

the Scottish Gov-

ernment went to

state school like me

and you, unlike

Westminster where

the government is

made up largely of

millionaires educat-

ed privately. Who's

more likely to be in

line with the work-

ing man? In the UK

20-25% of children

live in poverty, we

have the 4th most

unequal society in

the developed

world, the disabled

and elderly are

treated like crimi-

nals over benefit

payments (which

they're entitled to).

By 2016 the Scottish

budget will have

been cut by 11%

which impacts

heavily on our abil-

ity to keep the NHS

public, prescriptions

for the elderly free

as well as education

for our young folk.

We need to control

our finances to pro-

tect these vital

things, they've al-

ready lost them

down south so it's

just a matter of time

for us if we remain

in the UK. I'd like

someone to explain

in the UK, where all

the major parties are

now influenced

through neo-

liberalism, where the

hope of change is

for the working

class, the poor, the

elderly, the disabled

and other disadvan-

taged groups?

- Kevin Brown

Robin Drummond

@RDrummond1

Craiglockhart De-

bate

I stood with some

friends at a bus stop

in central Edinburgh

in the light drizzle of

a typical Scottish

summer. Of the four

of us, two were de-

cided, 2 that most

crucial and sought

after commodity,

the swing voter. Our

destination, a short

trip down to

Craiglockhart Parish

Church, for a debate

between Jim Eadie

the MSP for the area

and his Westminster

counterpart Alistair

Darling - a senior

politician, leader of

the Better Together

Campaign and for-

mer Chancellor of

the Exchequer. Per-

haps a tall order for

the relatively inex-

perienced SNP Holy-

rood backbencher

Eadie, tonight how-

ever, equals under

the stain glassed

eyes of the Church.

An older couple ap-

proached the bus

stop, deep in con-

versation about

which bus went to

Craiglockhart, he

proudly displayed a

Yes badge on his

raincoat. We all got

to talking, him a

Scot and an ardent

Yes supported, her,

an English Lib Dem

voter believing her

and her husband are

Better Together. A

tricky household I’m

sure.

As we ar-

rived at the Parish,

Better Together

leafleters guarded

the gates, the short

straw in the rain.

The hall was already

quite full. The Minis-

ter was later to in-

form us that Thurs-

days are usually

youth club night, yet

you perhaps

wouldn’t have

guessed from the

demographic in at-

tendance. People

continued to pack

in, the upper seating

had to be opened.

Yet as the Minister,

Rev Gordon Kenne-

dy opened proceed-

ings there was

standing room only

for those still eager

to see their elected

representatives

stand-off. He

stressed his and his

Parish’s impartiality,

their role simply to

help inform voters

ahead of the refer-

endum. For this they

must be commend-

ed. He asked kindly

for no heckling, with

a lot of questions to

get through, he

wanted to let the

two speakers give

their thoughts. And

so it began, a posi-

tive message from

each to get the ball

rolling.

Eadie

opened with his

thanks to the Parish,

an example of the

energy gathering all

across Scotland in

recent times. The

desire to decide

what kind of coun-

try we live in, shape

it to be our own

once again. He ech-

oed the request of

Jim Sillars that in

memory of the late

and great Margo

MacDonald, we

conduct our debate

the Margo way, full

of passion, com-

mitment and above

all respect. Then he

got into the nitty

gritty, sighting the

Financial Times re-

port that an inde-

pendent Scotland

would be richer per

head of population

than the rest of the

UK, the Standard

and Poors review,

giving a post indy

Scotland a better

credit rating, even

without the oil and

gas revenue, than

the rest of the UK

and placing us in the

top 20 economies in

the world. Scotland

has raised higher tax

receipts in each of

the last 33 years he

said. We voted for

Devolution in ’97 he

argued, because

people were sick of

Westminster and the

politics of big busi-

ness not represent-

ing the people of

Scotland. Despite

this, we still have no

real change. In the

90’s it was British

rail, now it’s the

Post Office their try-

ing to privatise.

With independence,

we get what we vote

for. Scotland must

be independent and

able to represent

itself if it is to fulfil

its potential in the

international com-

munity.

Darling’s

turn. He too,

thanked the Church,

chuckling at the first

of few things he and

Jim would agree

upon. He began by

stressing the im-

portance of the ref-

erendum, the most

important decision

of our lives. Irrevo-

cable he reinforced.

He claimed that he

wants many of the

same things for

Scotland as Eadie, its

simply the way to

achieve them that

the two men differ

on. The finance sec-

tor in Edinburgh

sells more to the

rest of the UK than

it does to the rest of

the world, our econ-

omy needs this, why

put a barrier? There

are many jobs de-

pendent on the UK,

defence for one,

food and drinks an-

other. In the increas-

ingly globalised

world, it is an ad-

vantage to be part

of something big-

ger. We already

have power over our

own social policies

at Holyrood, but we

also benefit as part

of the UK. When the

oil goes, the short-

fall in income, 25%

of our economy he

claimed, will be

spread to the UK not

just the small popu-

lation of Scotland.

He closed by once

again telling his au-

dience that inde-

pendence is not

about party colours,

if we vote Yes, its

forever.

Question

time. “If Scotland

votes Yes will UK

debt be divided, if

so, how and how

will Scotland finance

its share?”

Darling was

straight in, stating

that Scotland cannot

walk away from the

debt which it played

a hand in creating. A

statement immedi-

ately met with jeers

and boos from the

crowd. He took the

phrase; if we take a

share of the assets

we must assume a

share of the costs.

He pointed to the

white papers pro-

posal that an inde-

pendent Scotland

would have a lower

corporation tax,

claiming that in or-

der to make this a

reality, income tax

would need to be in

increased to balance

the books.

Jim was able

to respond at this

point, stating that

we would have to

service our share of

the debt, regardless

of whether our share

was proportioned

due to population

size or GDP. Return-

ing to the point of

the possible increase

in tax, Eadie stated

that cutting Trident

will save us nearly

200 million per year,

we would save 50

million a year with-

out paying for Scot-

tish MP’s to West-

minster. Eadie also

stressed that our

national income is

not as oil dependent

as Darling had

claimed. 15% rather

than 25% of the na-

tion’s cash comes

from oil he stated.

With all these sav-

ings, the state can

afford to lower

some taxes without

having to increase

others he said. Don’t

be afraid of the bo-

geyman basically.

“An estimat-

ed 30,000 people

live on the opposite

side of the border

that they work. A

further 100,000

travel across the

border to do daily

business. Where

would their tax go?”

Eadie, to his

credit, was honest

enough to admit he

couldn’t give a de-

finitive answer, it

was a question to be

answered round the

discussion table af-

ter a Yes vote forced

politicians to work it

out. Darling jumped

on the opportunity

to show off his

knowledge as ex-

chancellor. Interna-

tional laws already

exist for this sort of

thing he said, in

general you pay tax

to where your are

domicile, though

there can be special

cases.

“If Scotland

votes Indy, there will

be costs for set up.

Has this been con-

sidered? Specifically

has our defence out

with the UK been

look at?”

Jim was

happy to talk about

the existence of

Holyrood already

which is a nice base

to work from. Scot-

land already has a

lot institutions set

up in embryonic

format, for example

the Scotland Office

in Brussels, which

could grow into an

Embassy quite easi-

ly. There is also

room to continue

some cross border

organisations. Eadie

asserted that de-

fence could be made

more efficient and

less costly with in-

dependence. Cur-

rently 3 billion

pounds of Scottish

tax money is spent

on defence, Scot-

land only sees 1.9

billion of this spent

here. We don’t get

100% of our own tax

revenue but we do

get 100% of the nu-

clear weapons ca-

pacity. Stored a

stone throw from

Glasgow. There is

only 1 warship dedi-

cated to Scotland,

but we have the

biggest coastline,

and 1/3 of the land

mass of the UK.

Chuckling,

Alistair rhetorically

asked how one can

really quantify de-

fence? The idea of

looking at the Navy

as having only war-

ship for Scotland is

silly, it must be

viewed holistically.

An integrated army

works to defend an

integrated union. He

argued that Scot-

land without nuclear

capacity would not

be able to enter

NATO. He was heck-

led with claims of

“stick them in the

Thames!” It is the

personal opinion of

this reporter that,

here Darling knew

he was lying to his

audience. As a for-

mer cabinet minis-

ter, he is aware of

how NATO works

and the multitude of

its members that do

not have nuclear

potential. Example,

Norway, Italy, Alba-

nia, the list goes on.

He then returned to

the question of set

up costs and

wheeled out the

usual tag line; we

just don’t know and

uncertainty always

comes with risks,

always come with

costs and you can’t

start a new country

on that basis.

“What will

happen to state

pensions in an inde-

pendent Scotland?”

Eadie was

keen to stress that

at the outset the

current pension sys-

tem would be main-

tained post-

independence,

though it would be a

priority policy to be

reviewed. He as-

sured the audience

that they would not

see a devaluation in

the pensions they

have earned as part

of the UK. The triple

lock system would

remain. As Steve

Webb (the minister

for state pensions)

recently told the

press, citizenship is

irrelevant, it’s what

you put in that de-

termines what you

get out the system.

Jim also reminded

everyone that the

UK government un-

der both Tory and

Labour rule has rou-

tinely cut pensions

over and over.

In response,

Darling took Webb’s

comment from an-

other angle. Accord-

ing to him, Webb’s

comment was actu-

ally based on enti-

tlement. Pensions

work on a pay as go

basis. We don’t have

a fixed cash sum

waiting on us, we

have a level of enti-

tlement, if the gov-

ernment has less

money, our entitle-

ment will actually

pay out less cash. He

stated that we simp-

ly don’t know the

fiscal position an

independent Scot-

land would find it-

self in and therefore

we can’t define how

much a pension

would pay out in the

event of a Yes vote.

He added that he

couldn’t see the log-

ic in lowering the

tax pool, making it

harder to pay out

pensions. Of course

what he failed to say

is that if you lower

the pool of people

putting into the sys-

tem you are also

lowering the pool of

people taking out of

the system, it’s all

relative.

“If Scotland

retained the Pound,

what are the issues

with a currency un-

ion? Can the rUK

really stop us? If we

join the EU will we

not be forced to join

the Euro zone?”

Eadie first of

all accepted that

Osbourne has al-

ready ruled out a

currency union, but

then pointed to var-

ious examples of

why that is a bad

move and unlikely

to stand. Firstly he

stated that an inde-

pendent panel of

leading economists

including a former

chairman of the

Bank Of England

recommended a cur-

rency union as being

in the best interests

of both Scotland

and rUK. He also

mentioned the un-

named Westminster

official who has also

stated that the

blocking of the cur-

rency union pro-

posal wouldn’t

stand. He also

harked back to Dar-

ling’s earlier com-

ment that by taking

the assets we must

take a share of the

debt. Flipping it on

its head he stated

that if Westminster

wasn’t willing to

part with some of

the assets namely

the currency, then

an independent

Scotland need not

take the debt.

Darling in-

terjected at this

point, questioning

Eadie, what the plan

B would be if there

was no currency un-

ion. Jim responded

that as Alistair was

aware, Scotland

could use a fully

transferrable pound

out with the UK.

Darling was happy

at this point to re-

mind Jim that in

that situation, Scot-

land finds itself hav-

ing its interest rates

controlled by a for-

eign country. Which

is really the situation

it finds itself in at

the moment any-

way. Or, he threat-

ened, you could

have the Euro, which

no one wants. The

EU he claimed, have

made it a require-

ment for new en-

trants to take the

Euro.

With that it

was time for the

closing statements,

both seemed con-

tent with their input

to the night’s pro-

ceedings. Jim began

the closing senti-

ments by stating

that he was happy

with the integrity

coming from both

camps in the debate.

He acknowledged

that although he

and Alistair differed

on some points,

they were both here

for the same over-

arching goal, a bet-

ter future for Scot-

land. He believes the

best way to achieve

this is with inde-

pendence. Westmin-

ster has failed us

numerous times,

they continually

produce policies

that do not work for

Scotland that are

not in line with the

general beliefs of

the Scottish voters.

Of course he wants

Scotland to co-

operate with like-

minded people

across globe, but we

don’t need to be in a

political union to do

so. He wants to see

Scots have the abil-

ity to make policy

decisions for them-

selves.

Darling

shared many of the

same sentiments, it’s

the way to achieve

these things he dif-

fers on. He pointed

to our poor health

care, our education-

al needs, things he

believes are best

served in the union.

Economically he

stressed pragmatism

not idealism. With a

view to social issues,

he claimed that we

need to make this

decision, one that

will be with us the

rest of our lives,

with our heads, not

our hearts.

With that,

the debate came to

a close, hands were

shaken, poses taken

up for the camera.

People leaving mut-

tered to one another

their own opinions

on what each speak-

er had said. All in all,

there was nothing

ground breaking

from either side.

Both representatives

had generally towed

their respective par-

ty lines, the same

arguments we have

heard over and over

from both camps.

The evening should

have been an oppor-

tunity for Darling to

get an advantage in

his constituency

over his MSP coun-

terpart Eadie. How-

ever, in truth, Dar-

ling was never able

to really take an ad-

vantage in the de-

bate, and as such, it

would be hard to

see how he has

made any progress

with his local voters.

As the far more ex-

perienced politician

the ball was very

much in Darling’s

court yet Eadie

managed to prevent

him scoring any real

points, in this re-

porter’s opinion.

Nights like this

should not be un-

derestimated. Tak-

ing the debate to

church halls, coffee

shops, pubs and

bars, street corners,

wherever people can

access it is the most

important element

of this referendum.

Oddly I find myself

agreeing with Dar-

ling here, whichever

way we vote as a

nation we must live

with the conse-

quences. So all I can

do is ask that you

find out everything

you can, because

once you do, hope-

fully you too will

realise that we can’t

afford to co

Recommended

Reading:

‘Referendum or no

referendum, it's per-

fectly obvious the

CBI is an economi-

cally right-wing

lobbying group’

Patrick Harvie

Evening Times,

Glasgow

http://www.evening

times.co.uk/author/

patrick-harvie

------------------------

E.U. Readings:

http://wire.novaram

edia.com/2014/05/9

-things-you-might-

not-expect-from-

the-greens-eu-

manifesto/

Adam Ramsey co-

vers some of what

we describes as

things you might

not expect to see in

the Greens EU mani-

festo.

-----------------------

Wings Over Scot-

land

http://wingsoversco

tland.com/author/d

ouglas-daniel/

Rev Campbell inves-

tigates the hype

that’s been stirred

up by the new Vote

No Border groups.

------------------------

Scottish Independ-

ence Is a Natural

Progression

Scotland is a nation

of peoples: we all

have a brain, so let’s

use it! We the peo-

ple can run our

country better, in a

new 21st Century

Scottish democracy,

than an out of date

Westminster Model

prioritising the elite.

We have always

been and will always

be a country within

a union and there-

fore when experts,

financial advisers,

Nobel Prize Winning

Laureates, scientists,

academics and even

David Cameron sug-

gest that Scotland

can not only be an

independent coun-

try, but a successful,

prosperous and rich

independent coun-

try, that is where I

put my cross in the

YES box. For many

years Westminster

has continued to

treat Scotland as

some sort of Celtic

appendage on the

end of a London-

centric state which is

fuelled by capital-

ism. It must end. For

those who feel their

British identity is

personally im-

portant, this will

remain, as an inde-

pendent Scotland

geographically re-

sides on the British

Isles. Ironically,

those in Better To-

gether criticise the

YES campaign for

being separatists,

although it has been

Westminster that

has abandoned Brit-

ish values such as

the welfare state,

helping the working

people, caring for

the elderly, and for-

getting about those

north of Hadrian’s

Wall. It must

change. Inevitably,

there are two paths:

whether to continue

stripping back the

welfare state,

squeezing the mid-

dle class and ignor-

ing the needs of the

most vulnerable in

our society in a

Westminster model,

or developing and

moulding a new sys-

tem, focussed on

equality in Scotland.

Again it is ironic as

the No camp miss

the point of their

slogan completely,

only through voting

YES can we be Better

Together as the rela-

tionship between

Scotland and the

rest of the UK (espe-

cially England) will

be redefined and

Scotland will be an

equal partner,

standing shoulder to

shoulder with the

UK. It must work.

This change must

happen, or all par-

ties on the British

Isles will continue to

spiral down into this

bottomless pit

where never ending

levels of debt and

no financial recovery

is possible and be-

comes the norm.

Independence for

Scotland is the small

piece of rope which

can ensure we climb

out of the pit and

into a new-look

Scotland, ready to

trade and work with

other small and

large independent

countries in this

world and to decen-

tralise and make key

decisions IN Scot-

land which will af-

fect Scotland. It is

only natural. There

are many small suc-

cessful independent

countries which

have less resources

and financial ser-

vices than Scotland

and it could just be

that independence

makes us one of

them. Do we need to

be in the UN Securi-

ty Council? No. We

have our resources

to trade and innova-

tion from our peo-

ple, like the power-

house that is Ger-

many or other small

equal and rich coun-

tries that are Lux-

embourg, Norway

and Denmark. If

Scotland falls from

the 13th

to the 14th

most rich country in

the world, we

should not worry

but congratulate the

other 13 for running

their country

properly. Scotland

would still be rich

but inevitably, it is

how we use our re-

sources and money.

What do we priori-

tise? This can only

be achieved by

transferring all the

powers of an inde-

pendent country to

Scotland, in order to

decentralise deci-

sion-making as close

to the people on the

ground as possible

and establish what

the real issues are in

our communities.

Only Scottish Inde-

pendence will bring

issues such as the

gender pay gap,

childcare and green

issues onto the

agenda. Block out

the negativity and

fear from the No

campaign. Scotland

is a global brand

and we’ve got what

it takes. Scotland

must vote YES.

Andrew Dove

_______________________

Labour’s Devolution

Proposal Comes Too

Late

By Luke Campbell

@lukecampbell6

‘The ‘No’ campaign

is not working, and

the UK Labour Par-

ty’s recent proposals

for devolution are

an admission of the

failure of the cam-

paign that they had

previously thrown

their weight behind.

The proposals are

dependent on the

Labour party getting

back into power in

Westminster, a sce-

nario which at the

moment does not

look likely given the

support for both the

Conservative and

UKIP parties in Eng-

land. As the SNP’s

John Swinney stated

on Question Time

(23/01/2014), these

new proposals are

promising even less

power than we were

told that we would

receive under the

Calman Commission

Proposals back in

1999. The British

Labour Party knows

that the No cam-

paign is failing, and

proposals increase

the Scottish Gov-

ernment’s control

over UK retained law

from 16% to 20%,

are them jumping

ship. Westminster

already rejected re-

quests from the SNP

for a second ques-

tion on the ballot

paper, offering a

form of Devo Max

as an alternative.

Where was the sup-

port for that second

question from the

Labour party then?

Lamont was too

busy voting against

policy proposals

that the SNP put

forward, including

free school meals,

simply because they

came from the SNP.

This Labour alterna-

tive to Scottish in-

dependence is com-

ing too little, too

late. The Scottish

people now know

that they face a

straight forward

Yes/No choice in

September. Yes to a

brighter future, or

voting no and con-

tinuing with more of

the same. More en-

forced austerity,

more governments

that we in Scotland

didn’t vote for. The

behaviour of CBI

Federation, the BBC,

and the MMS has

seen the Scottish

population wake up

to the totality of the

ultimatum that they

face, and the ‘Yes’

side is gaining more

momentum every

day.

_______________________

Tackling the Hous-

ing Crisis

-Calum Martin

Amongst the

pages of the news

last week it was an-

nounced that a

property in Edin-

burgh has gone on-

to the market ex-

pecting to break the

previous record for

most expensive

property sold in Ed-

inburgh and the Lo-

thians of £5million.

Properties

selling for more

than £5million are

obviously not the

most common fea-

ture of the housing

market in Scotland.

Far more common is

the rising cost of

rent. Most students

will surely currently

be noticing rising

rents as they make

their arrangements

for the next aca-

demic year. Year on

year, rents are now

broadly rising, and

in an age of low and

often falling wages,

this places a massive

fiscal burden on

many in our society.

In extreme cases

that burden can be-

come simply too

much to bear. The

Scottish Churches

Housing Action

group published sta-

tistics that calculat-

ed by the end of

2013 there were at

least 65’000 people

suffering from

homelessness in

Scotland. With the

spectre of the Bed-

room tax still hang-

ing over us, waiting

to come back into

full effect, (and it

won’t be truly ban-

ished until a yes

vote this Septem-

ber), the housing

question must be

addressed.

No truly

long term solution

can be found with-

out tackling the un-

derlying problems

of the shortage of

affordable housing.

For the Scottish So-

cialist Party, a key

plank of that solu-

tion must be our

policy for the con-

struction of 100’000

new council homes

across Scotland (as

recommended also

by the homelessness

charity, Shelter) over

a four year period,

available for afford-

able rent to be fol-

lowed by a general

and continued

building up of the

public housing con-

struction sector. You

can find more de-

tails at the SSP web-

site. Such a project

would go a great

way towards tack-

ling the housing cri-

sis, controlling rent

escalations, helping

to ease the cost of

living crisis for many

of the most vulner-

able in society and

further. It is a long

term solution, and

one our society des-

perately needs.

Construction

of council housing

has been allowed to

slump in recent

years by the neo-

liberal parties. A

piece in the Guardi-

an a year or so ago

revealed that by

2010 and the end of

the last New Labour

government, there

were almost as

many council houses

being built in the

whole of England

each year as in the

whole of Scotland

each year. We’re

talking about a

great many Labour

councils under a pe-

riod of Labour gov-

ernment, and the

figures had contin-

ued to slump. It

goes without saying

that the Tories are

hardly going to be

building them. The

truth of the matter

is that we simply

cannot trust the

neo-liberal parties

to deliver them. The

SSP has always

pushed for greater

construction. We

continue to do so

today and will con-

tinue to do so into

the future. Where

there are elected

SSP councillors that

demand is carried

forward again and

pressure put on the

heart of council lev-

el decision making,

and as the SSP con-

tinues to grow in

strength, the convic-

tion that we need to

tackle the housing

question head on

remains an un-

shakeable principle.

Housing should not

be a commodity to

be granted or de-

nied to maximise

profit. Decent hous-

ing should be some-

thing everyone has

access too as a basic

human right. That is

a core principle of

the Scottish Socialist

Party – a principle

the neo-liberal par-

ties seem deter-

mined to quietly

reject.

_______________________

An Open Letter to

the Undecided

Luke Campbell

@lukecampbell6

In a carefully word-

ed open letter

online blogger

Shaun address un-

decided voters with

some food for

thought, recapping

some of the issues

that were of concern

to him when script-

ing the post. Taking

care to ensure that

his words were di-

rect and leave no

room for misinter-

pretation, he re-

counts his journey

from a default No

voter to a firm Yes.

In a letter that at

points resembles the

‘too wee, too poor,

too stupid, rhetoric,

and Jim Sillar’s ‘Be-

tween the hours…’

speech, Shaun talks

of how the over the

top scaremongering

from the mean

stream media, and

the lack of any bal-

anced reporting lead

him to search online

for his own answers.

He recommends us-

ing ‘a combination

of mainstream me-

dia and newspapers

combined with

online websites such

as Wings Over Scot-

land, Business for

Scotland and Bella

Caledonia’, to

achieve a balanced

view of all sides of

the debate, and

pleads that readers

take the time to ed-

ucate themselves so

as to make an in-

formed decision

come 18th

Septem-

ber.

You can find the full

letter at the below

address:

http://scottishpoke

mon.wordpress.com

/2014/05/11/an-

open-letter-to-the-

undecided/

_______________________

More prominent

figures come out in

favour of a Yes vote:

Canyon Kenyon

Wright, who held in

the formation of the

Scottish devolved

parliament, declared

himself in favour of

a Yes-vote come

September, in a let-

ter published in the

Sunday Herald of

11th

May. Kenyon

Wright, who had

previously called for

a radical overhaul of

the way that West-

minster operated,

stated that ‘inde-

pendence is needed

to complete "unfin-

ished business and

allow the new Scot-

land of our hopes to

emerge’.

Read more here:

http://www.heraldsc

ot-

land.com/politics/re

ferendum-

news/devolution-

architect-comes-

out-in-support-of-a-

yes-vote.24189460

------------------------

https://www.edfring

e.com/whats-

on/events/national-

collective-presents

http://archive.today

/H1Wlo

Michael Stewart,

former Hearts cap-

tain, currently work-

ing as a football

commentator, stat-

ed that ‘A Yes vote

means more oppor-

tunity for people

from all walks of

life, but especially

for sport.” Shona

Robinson added

“Sport for Yes is a

new and exciting

part of the grass-

roots Yes movement

bringing together

athletes, former ath-

letes, sports men

and women, and

fans of sport.”

‘Visions of Inde-

pendence I’

Room: George

Square Lecture The-

atre

Friday 23rd May

Time: 17:00 - 18:00

Speakers:

Sarah Beattie-Smith

(Radical Independ-

ence Campaign)

Kate Higgins (Wom-

en for Independ-

ence)

Robin McApline

(Common Weal)

Assad Khan Scots-

Asians for Inde-

pendence & SYP

Zareen Taj (Individ-

ual)

Could everyone

please try to arrive

at the venue by

16:45 to ensure that

we start promptly at

17:00. After the talk

we will relocate to a

nearby pub, TBC, to

continue the discus-

sion informally.

------------------------

‘16-30 Yes Public

Event’

Venue: 'The Halls',

Henderson Street,

Leith

Date: Monday 2nd

June

Time: 19:30-21:30

(doors open 7pm)

Speakers:

Angles Constance

MSP (Cabinet Secre-

tary for Training,

Youth and Women's

Employment)

Andrew Dove (SNP

Edinburgh Eastern

Youth Convenor)

Cat Boyd (Radical

Independence Cam-

paign)

For further infor-

mation and a huge

range of resources,

please check out the

following:

Solidarity

Scottish Independ-

ence Convention

Scot Referendum

Working Class Man

Greg Moodie

Holyrood Magazine

Kevin McKenna

Undecided?

TA of Morisura

Subrosa

Scotland Tonight

Scot Goes Pop!

Referendum2014

Munguin's Republic

Michael Greenwell

Lallands Peat Worri-

er

Yes Scotland

Reid Foundation

Wee Ginger Dug

BBC.Scotlandshire

Common Weal

Scottish Left Review

Scottish Social Atti-

tudes Survey

Young-Scots For In-

dependence

Generation Yes

SRSM

Yes LGBT

Wealthy Nation

Third Sector Yes

IndyPosterBoy.info

Bright Green Scot-

land

Socialist Worker

KILTR

Academics For Inde-

pendence

Christians For Inde-

pendence

YouGov.co.uk

WhatScot-

landThinks.orgAbou

tMyVote.co.uk

NationalCollec-

tive.com

LabourForIndy.com

SNP

SSP

Scottish Greens

Women For Inde-

pendence

Scots-Asians For In-

dependence

Scotland’s Vote

Bella Caledonia

Wings Over Scot-

land

News Net Scotland

Independent News-

paper

Independence Mag-

azine

Radical Independ-

ence

Business For Scot-

land

C’mon Scotland

Derek Bateman

The Sunday Herald

______________________

I’d just like to close

by saying a massive

thank you to every-

one that got in-

volved in the crea-

tion of issue two.

Particular thanks go

out to Emily, Rich-

ard and Robin for

their detailed and

sizable contribu-

tions.

As always check out

our Facebook page

and get in touch

with our editor at

luke.gardenofedin20

14@gmail.com

Thanks to Emily In-

gram, Richard Lovell,

Ivan Janskevic, David

Aitchison, Lucas

McGregor-Paas, An-

gus Nicoll, Robin

Drummond, Magnus

Jamieson, David

Kelly, Jonny Ross-

Tatam, Calum Win-

ter, Fraser Dick, Amie

Robertson, Charles

Lang, Calum Martin,

Andrew Dove, James

Puchowski, Dash

Sekhar, Kevin Brown,

Joseph L. Reid, Andy

Connelly-Nimmo,

Seonaid Francis,

Shirley Watson, Pad-

dy Williams, James

Whyte, Bob Leslie,

Chris Jack, and Assad

Khan.