However, losing a parliament was not considered as great a loss in 1707 as it would be today. In this most exhaustive independent survey of Scottish opinion, two-thirds said either that the Scottish Parliament should take all decisions for Scotland 35% or that it should make all decisions apart from defence and foreign affairs 32%. All part of One Nation Labourism. Yet this is the one option that Scots are not allowed to choose in next year's referendum. The E-mail message field is required.
With a Conservative-led government back in Westminster, the divergence of political culture between Scotland and England is becoming more pronounced. But crucially the Presbyterian Kirk accepted the deal because the Acts of Union left it in sole charge of its own religious turf, and for most Scots this was more important than the location of a parliament in which they had no say. And while 1848 may have been springtime for nations on the Continent, it was still winter in Scotland. I'm glad that Border are doing this. That, plus the discovery of Scottishoil, launched the wave of constitutional innovation that ultimately led to the creation of the Scottish Parliament in 1999.
Scotland's parliament was folded into Westminster with indecent haste. As an outsider looking in, despite the author's statements to the contrary the history depicted in the book makes Scotland appear like a colony of England or at least London. By the end of the 19 th Century Scotland was arguably the most technologically advanced country in the world after England and Glasgow called itself the Second City of the British Empire. In 2013, he publish Iain Macwhirter is the political commentator of The Herald and the Sunday Herald, an author and documentary film and radio presenter and a former Rector of Edinburgh University. Following the Scottish independence referendum, he published Disunited Kingdom: How Westminster Won a Referendum but Lost Scotland, a retrospective on his experiences as a journalist documenting the campaign. An accessible, fast overview of political history leading up to the Independence referendum. So, on the one hand,we have the Scottish National Party offering a form of ersatz autonomy, which leaves so much power with Westminster that it is hard to call it independence.
In case readers of this review think I am being hard on the book because I disagree with it, I should point out that I am currently tending towards the pro-Independence camp myself, so am largely in agreement with the main thrust of MacWhirter's argument that Scotland could be a successful independent nation if it chooses. And what does the future hold for both countries, north and south of the border? A great deal of Glasgow money went into this promising venture. The fate of Scotland may be decided by the frustrated middle who decline to make any choice at all. Scots continued to respond to the call of the British empire in 1914, enlisting in prodigious numbers and dying disproportionately in the trenches. In 1674 we find recorded the first cargo of tobacco from Virginia. Scotland was not a democracy at the start of the 18th century, it was more like a theocracy, dominated by the Presbyterian Kirk. Back home, the fantasy image of the heroic Highlander, created by the novels of Sir Walter Scott, captivated Victorian England and helped turn Scotland into a deer-hunting theme park for the English upper classes.
And there's a very good reason for this. How did Scotland go from being willing partners in a union to the brink of independence? No one in their right minds would say that its bias in general terms is anything other than unionist. A companion book, Road To Referendum, by Iain Macwhirter, is published next week by Cargo Publishing, £13. Clearly even if there were two companies you would be able to get reception of both around the border region, but you need to be able to get a Scottish programme, otherwise you are being fed news about English schools and hospitals, policing and law, etc that doesn't affect you. Forced to go it alone the Scots thought up the idea of founding a trading colony of their own on the Isthmus of Darien, which connects North and South America and seperates the Carribean Sea from the Pacific Ocean, apparently a natural centre of World trade. Its public's wishes are generally ignored, with mass protest and civil disobedience making no difference until similar protests occur closer to or in London.
Scotland became a hub of the British Industrial Revolution, thanks to James Watt and his steam engine. Scotland increasingly resembles a Nordic country in terms of economic and political culture. Scots continued to respond to the call of the British Empire in 1914, enlisting in prodigious numbers and dying disproportionately in the trenches. Yet, Scotland has no real history or tradition of political nationalism, at least not on the scale of Ireland or any of the former British colonies that sought independence in the 1950s and 60s. The fate of Scotland may be decided by the frustrated middle who decline to make any choice at all. I have also written a book of the same name - - which is launched at the Aye Write book festival in Glasgow on 17th June published by This charts the history of the national question in Scotland since the Middle Ages, through the age of Empire - when Scots fought Britain's wars and ran much of its colonial business - to the present existential crisis of British unionism. However, I would have preferred to see an unbiased account of the main arguments or to have been told up front that this book is a personal viewpoint heavily geared towards one side of the debate.
In this case anything to encourage the fact that bordered in any countries are more influenced by what goes on just on the other side of whatever border. We could be only eighteen months away from the dissolution of one of the most successful political unions in history: the United Kingdom - a country whose empire once dominated the planet. Were they shown at a different time that I missed, or were they judged of little interest to our friends and neighbours over the Tweed? We could be only 15 months away from the dissolution of one of the most successful political unions in history: the United Kingdom, a country whose empire once dominated the planet. It offers a huge sweep of history and deals with recent Scottish politics in formidable, but never tedious detail. Don't let's go crazy here. Following the , he published Disunited Kingdom: How Westminster Won A Referendum But Lost Scotland, a retrospective on his experiences as a journalist documenting the campaign.
England didn't move for the treaty out of altruism, of course. Joan McA is on the case though!!! It wanted the security of the Hanoverian succession, and it also needed Scottish taxes and Scottish men to fight its battles with France. EricF Something else I've noticed I think. . To avoid that fate, many Scots may be tempted to vote Yes in September 2014, even though they don't want independence. EricF Here in the Borders we had the Carlisle based service for years, and it's easy to see why many folk might want a return to that, on the basis that its better than what comes out of Gateshead.
Any advice from YouViewers here appreciated. By the mid 19 th Century, Scots were flattering themselves that they were the best bit of the Empire — the hardy ones who did the work, handled the natives and even lent a moral dimension through the work of Scots missionaries like David Livingstone. With Conservative-led government back in Westminster, the divergence of political culture between Scotland and England is becoming more pronounced. Scots, many cleared off their ancestral lands by former clan chiefs, were turned into industrial wage slaves. Others may vote No, even though they want a deeper form of devolution. EricF Sorry, been away for a bit.