A Conference Speech


Theresa May and husband at the start of the Tory Party Conference held in Birmingham at a police security cost of an estimated £2.5 million

On leaving Europe to the wolves, England’s current prime minister – that chore has no relevance to Scotland’s ambitions and so forfeits the right to be classified as ‘UK prime minister’ – Theresa May said: “This is the first stage in the UK becoming a sovereign, independent country once again.” Now, there’s a familiar phrase.

The main problem with it is the obvious one, the UK is not a country.

The UK is a union of nations. If independence is such a freeing of constraints for England’s parliament, you wonder what threat they see in Scotland becoming a sovereign and independent country once again. No amount of rhetorical blather from May can alter the fact that she had no Plan A let alone a Plan B for dumping Europe.

The extreme ferocity and a deal of sadism visited upon Scotland’s legitimate wish to govern its own affairs, abuse from all sides of English intelligentsia, has a purpose.

What scares them?

It helps to understand the colonial mentality if you reverse the politics and, painful as it will be, see things from their point of view, that is, Scotland as England’s hinterland.

The exercise in colonial thinking offers a fascinating insight into their reasoning. It could be Theresa May writing a paper for Cabinet discussion, or her main address to the Tory conference, the draft penned by any of her trusted advisers and civil servants.

‘Those Pesky Scots’ – the speech

Popular movements are not good for a nation’s stability. The main enemy of our ambition is Scotland’s indigenous popular movement, people such as over-zealous independence supporters, habitual kilt wearers, SNP members, intellectuals, writers, university students, business companies, and non-Tory party affiliated landowners, all those who attempt to withhold or steal our resources that happen to be in their country. Hence, Scots in general are people who oppose our interests, people to be persuaded to our thinking.

Scotland has entered its second Enlightenment. This is very inconvenient as well as regressive. It destabilises our plans for expansion in all sorts of ways. Immediately to mind spring plans to capitalise on ditching the European Union, plans for our southern regions, putting at risk major projects such as renewing our Victorian sewers, rebuilding the House of Commons, implementing plans for a High Speed Train to the north, and indeed, plans for a Northern powerhouse, regeneration that need Scottish taxes and oil to subsidise it.

Our attempts, aided by our newspapers and media, to present Scotland’s reawakening of romantic ideals as the mischievous machinations of an eccentric minority, paints our legitimate reaction as unduly intolerant, plain fearful of the outcome. Nevertheless, as Scotland is part of the UK, and so part of us, we are forced to regard Scottish political assertiveness as internal aggression.

We cannot use force to keep people in check, as we did in the past with, say, Ireland, and our other colonies. We cannot kettle an entire territory. We must be subtle in how we isolate troublesome groups to constrain protest.

Scots, and migrants who identify with their goals, are stupidly concerned with vague and idealistic objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. We in England have those systems in place already, or at least enough to satisfy us we are free citizens. And as England is Scotland, and Scotland is England, indistinguishable one from another, Scots should be content too.

Scotland, even with its backwardness and  stubbornness, finds it difficult to understand that its function is to complement the industrial and financial needs of the rest of the UK. Moreover, we cannot engage in new military adventures abroad if we have part of the United Kingdom setting its face hard against invasion or partition in nations that regard our territorial rights, or enforcing democracy, as against international law.

Scotland exists to serve the needs of the groups that dominate our societies and create our wealth, I mean banks and investment houses. The major danger posed by these indigenous enemies is that unless they are stopped in time, they may spread the virus of independence, freedom, and concern for human welfare infecting English regions.

We do not want our barrel of apples infected. That will threaten the stability of our Great British Plans. Consequently we are obliged to prevent the rot from spreading. The threat of rot and infection is a serious one, which requires serious measures. It is the defence of our highest values, our realm, our sceptred isle, in the classic English manner the world has come to know and respect.

To overcome these threats, we must resort to discipline and sanction. One considerable means at our disposal is the Barnett Formula whereby Scotland provides our Treasury with all it earns annually, and in return we give it an allowance. That can and should be reduced step by step, until the people squeal in pain, and realise they have no substantial means to sustain an economy. Standards will fall as will their appointed representatives that hoodwink their voters into believing their exists a heaven on earth, a ‘perfect’ society.

Another tool we have is the way we calculate Scotland’s income and expenditure, known as GERS – Government and Expenditure Scotland. We can use that to show Scotland has little or no income sufficient to support an independent outlook. There is nothing more potent than the fiscal argument. It serves to mould Scots and English attitudes.

Lastly, there is the exterior threat. It includes terrorists either working from abroad, or more potently, ‘within our midst’, migrants and refugees, in addition to European countries especially France and Germany, and also Russia, nation states intent on world domination.

Meanwhile, the threat of democratic politics can be met in the natural way. We must portray Scotland’s ambitions as replicating early post-war fascist ideals, goals built on false grievance, an inability to pool and share.

There is only one sensible answer to the Scottish question. We must invoke the rotten apple theory in all its forms as much as possible. What Scottish nationalists threaten will harm the potential success of our social and economic development, and possibly our deep and abiding friendship with our greatest ally, the United States.

The virus that may spread contagion is what we can call the “demonstration effect,” which can cause the rot to spread as others seek to emulate Scotland’s belligerence. Spain will have none of it. Spain agrees with us. Conformity has to be our goal if we are to  grow and prosper. The UK as a country is sovereign and independent. We cannot have a region of the UK declare itself autonomous.

That threat to our well-being is as we describe. It is “the threat of a good example.”

I commend this policy to the conference.

(The term ‘threat of good example’ is an American term first used in the Fifties.)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to A Conference Speech

  1. Ghillie says:


  2. broonpot says:

    Thank you. A brilliant example of how Indy supporters should understand the dead hand of UK nationalism

  3. carjamtic says:

    Nice GB excellent summation.

    For the removal of any doubt, Life means Life, there will be No parole, however to be ‘seen’ to be following the democratic process and to demonstrate our acknowledgement of the Scot’s Human Rights, we will appoint a parole board and a governor, now shut it.

  4. jeordee says:

    A nice wee take seen from the other side but not quite a true tale. GERS is of course endorsed by the Scottish government and they produce the figures.

    Scotland isn’t a Colony or treated like a Colony, it’s an easy out for a lot of independence supporters to see us this way as then the economic argument doesn’t have to be addressed as much.

    Lastly, there was a referendum held just to short years ago and the majority of the Scottish population didn’t seem to share your views.

    A nice, well written take though and I enjoyed it and no doubt a few folk down south really do think that way, thankfully, the majority tend to be just like us Scots.

  5. Scotsfox says:

    The Scottish Govt do not produce the figures. They collate figures produced by UK Treasury. Most of them guestimates at best.

  6. Grouse Beater says:

    Scotland isn’t a Colony or treated like a Colony

    “Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”

  7. “Not treated like a colony.”
    Coulda fkkn fooled me…

  8. jeordee says:

    From the Scottish Government website

    ‘The Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS) web area provides information on the annually published GERS report. GERS is compiled by statisticians and economists in the Office of the Chief Economic Adviser of the Scottish Government. The Scottish Government’s Chief Statistician takes responsibility for this publication.’

    If this is not the case then clearly the Scottish Government are lying for accepting responsibility for GERS. We can therefore take from this that our Government stands by these figures, indeed they based the Independence white Paper around GERS figures for the preceding years.

    We simply cannot throw a source of information out because it no longer fits our model as GERS was, and is a baseline for independence.

  9. Grouse Beater says:


    Before you embarrass yourself:

    The Chief Economist Adviser gets the statistics from the Treasury, though unfortunately he has no access to how they are compiled. He cannot verify them. GERS also leaves out a whole set of categories.

    It’s similar to a client receiving a construction invoice with no detail as to how the month’s total was compiled, but only notification of what materials were supplied. Also, the invoice fails to show a breakdown of the hours the construction crew worked, who was off ill, who was late for work.

    Two years ago John Swinney refused to endorse GERS unless those figures were first presented to the Scottish Government for checking before publication, and he was able to assess those categories under SG control. (Few in number!) This was partially agreed. At that point Swinney agreed to endorse them.

    The White Paper makes plain these are the ‘authoritative’ figures because no alternative exists. Think about it. The Barnett Formula is entirely a matter for the Treasury to compute – so, how can the SG calculate GERS?

    The politician who concocted GERS was Ian Lang who is on record as saying, they were a way of bamboozling Tory opponents, “but especially the nationalists.”

  10. jeordee says:

    And yet our own FM and the leader of the SNP believes the GERS figures.

    First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said:

    “The foundations of our economy remain strong. Scotland, in terms of economic output per head – and even excluding offshore revenues – remains the most prosperous part of the UK outside of London and South-east England.

    And today’s GERS publication shows that our onshore revenues continue to grow, with revenue increasing by £1.9 billion over the year, more than offsetting the decline in offshore revenue”

    Sounds like an endorsement to me.

  11. Grouse Beater says:

    Are you now arguing GERS is a load of tosh because our FM uses them as a basis of confidence?

  12. Tricx says:

    Found this , I don’t know if you read this blog , but an interesting slant on things , https://auldacquaintance.wordpress.com/

  13. jeordee says:

    No I’m saying that GERS is the authoritative publication on Scotlands finances as endorsed by the Current FM and the previous one in the Indy White Paper.

    If our leaders are using GERS as a tool to report economic success in one area then by any standards they also support the negatives that GERS produce in other areas as well.

    Realistically we have to be honest if we wish to move from a situation where we are part of the UK to being independent and lying to ourselves and those around us because it suits the current narrative is not a healthy place to start.

    The answer from the Scottish Governments own website regarding GERS is that the the figures are raw and the methodology used is entirely Scottish in nature carried out by the Scottish Government. I need say no more on this other than to ask anyone to read the SG site where this is stated.

  14. Grouse Beater says:

    That’s a blog worth reading, Tricx. I enjoyed his to and fro argument with a Brit nationalist, and his argument that there’s no such thing as a UK Law system.

  15. Grouse Beater says:

    It’s on England’s watch – stupid!

    Scotland has been part of the UK for 308 years.

    It’s had its own parliament for just 5% of that time.

    Today, in 2016, almost all key economic levers – taxation, welfare, immigration and many more – are directly controlled by Westminster, as is a huge chunk of “Scottish” spending. If the economy is a mess, 95% of that mess happened on the UK Parliament’s watch.

    Neither a borrower or a lender be

    The UK, which still controls around 40% of Scottish spending, doesn’t only gift Scotland the money to plug its deficit because it loves us so much. It takes out borrowing in Scotland’s name, whether it’s for stuff Scotland actually wants or not.

    Scotland gets no say in whether it wants or needs nuclear submarines or giant aircraft carriers, or a n new Heathrow runway.

    London makes the decision and puts it on Scotland’s tab.

    Basic maths

    If a sustainable deficit is (say) £10bn and your actual deficit is (say) £12bn, then the size of the “black hole” you need to address in a bad year – by generating extra income, borrowing or reducing spending – is £2bn, not £12bn. But that makes for a much less dramatic newspaper headline.

    When Ireland gained independence from the UK it negotiated an agreement which gave it none of the UK’s debt. If Scotland – which has a very strong negotiating position – were to do the same its “true” deficit, even in a very bad year like 2014-15, would be almost wiped out at a stroke.

    GERS as smoke screen

    GERS is totally irrelevant in the context of independence for a crucial reason – the entire point of independence is to NOT keep doing everything in Scotland the same way it’s been done in the UK.

    Scotland’s needs, strengths, weaknesses and priorities are different to those of the UK in all sorts of fields. Despite obvious similarities it’s a fundamentally different kind of country – less densely-populated, with different industries and demographic,s and a different idea of its place in the world.

    (Source Wings, UK Gov papers, and British Press)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s