Home > Uncategorized > Debunking the “Better Together” leaflet!

Debunking the “Better Together” leaflet!

Today, the “Better Together” came to Ayr High Street and various other high streets up and down Scotland to campaign against independence.

I popped down to see which activists turned up and from which parties. I also went to snag a leaflet and to see what arguments the “Better Together” campaign think will win Scotland over.

Below are images of the leaflet that the “Better Together” campaign have been handing out today around Scotland.

Health Warning: If you are allergic to bulls**t & lies, don’t read any further.

Whilst, this is true. Its only true for now, isn’t it?

After all, opinion polling suggests that 70% of Scots prefer a middle option between independence and the status quo. Something like Devo-max which would give control of pensions to the Scottish Government.

Devo-plus doesn’t send pensions to the Scottish Government but it does give other welfare payments to the Scottish Government so its not hard to see that if Scotland goes for Devo-plus, that soon after pensions might come north as well.

Inside the Better Together leaflet!

I’m going to take each of those points one by one!

1) Woohoo, we have 270 embassies! *sarcasm* Having 270 embassies around the world is not really of interest to me. Do we really need all those embassies? I’m for quality not quantity!

2) Unless, Westminster puts up trade sanctions with Scotland, stopping imports from Scotland, this is sadly going to stay the same unless of course we use our independence to build trading links with the rest of the world.

3) Are English, Welsh & Northern Irish firms all of a sudden going to leave Scotland, if Scotland goes independent? I think not.

4) Those 31,000 workers could easily re-train and join the new Scottish Foreign Office, Home Office, Defence Department, Department for Work & Pensions and all those sections of departments that are currently reserved to Westminster.

5) Scottish banks were bailed out. It sure would be interesting to see what would have happened had Scotland been independent. Would Westminster still needed to step in, at least in part to protect the rest of the UK’s accounts and pensions. I have a feeling they would.

6) A Swede doesn’t need papers or passport to live and work in Denmark and vice versa. Or are “Better Together” saying that relationships between the two nations would be too sour for that kind of thing.

7) Again, 2nd biggest aid budget, not the biggest vote swinger. Helping out other countries is good, but we’ll still give aid and I assume the rest of the UK will still give aid so does it matter that it comes from 2 sources instead of one?

8) Seat at the top table of the UN alongside Communist China, Putin’s Russia – those lovers of democracy & America, ah that country that has so much inequality. Do we really want to sit with these guys?

9) The triple AAA credit rating. We don’t know what credit rating companies will decide to give an indy Scotland but does it matter? If Scots want to be independent, what others say about our credit rating won’t matter, will they. After all independence is about making the decisions that affect Scotland, in Scotland by those who live in Scotland.

Last but not least the back page:

Back page of “Better Together” Leaflet

The “Better Together” leaflet is really disappointing. Its clear its been dreamt up by the pro-status quo camp. I think anyone who wants change, like myself, should disassociate themselves from this leaflet and the Better Together campaign. A better campaign name would be the Status Quo campaign.

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. August 25, 2012 at 17:22

    Very sad that the “Better Together” group still want to use scare tactics instead of giving a positive view of what the Union has to offer Scotland. When will they start a debate based of facts & drop these false scare stories.

    As you point out they are no positive points, no idea of what these parties would devolve to the Scottish Parliament if we vote No.

  2. August 25, 2012 at 19:27

    There’s no need for a referendum over devolving power to Scotland – we didn’t waste money on a referendum over the recent Scotland Act. The Lib Dem policy in the nineties was to simply implement devolution to all the regions of Britain without bothering with referendums.

    The aim at the moment should simply be to prevent the country from breaking up. We can argue about how to reform the place later. Saying that a No vote is a vote for the status quo is ridiculous – it’s a vote against a specific proposal and nothing more.

    The points about embassies, the UN and the aid budget look unambiguously positive to me. Surely they’re arguing that Scots have more influence over the world and a greater ability to improve it inside the UK?

    The economic points are key to the debate. They’re just a more parochial version of the arguments pro-Europeans use to promote the UK remaining part of the European Union.

    The only clear scare tactic is the pensions thing. If the proposition is that an independent Scotland would end up poorer (which I think it would) then it doesn’t seem unjustified to point out that specific items of public expenditure could come under strain.

    • August 25, 2012 at 20:17

      There was a referendum on devolution though in fact there were two of them. One in 1979 and one in 1997. I’m not saying whether there should be a referendum on devolving more power.

      As for a No vote, I’d sincerely like it to be a vote on the specific proposal just like I wanted the AV referendum to be solely on the issue of whether we implement AV or not. What happened when there was a No vote, David Cameron, Ed Miliband et al. all said it was a Yes vote for First Past the Post. The same will happen in 2014! I won’t let my vote be manipulated by anyone as a vote in favour of the status quo.

      The embassies, UN and aid can be interpreted as more influence in the world but most would sacrifice influence over the world for more influence at home.

      Economic points aren’t key and they shouldn’t be. The question is about where should power lie in Scotland, nothing else. It will have an impact on the economy, no doubt about it, but thats not a reason not to have the political powers to be able to shape the way we live.

      As for pensions, they are being reformed by this government so that in many people’s eyes they “pay more in for less out”. So, the idea that we stay in the Uk and then nothing happens to Scottish pensions is ridiculous. As a society, we are growing older and the generations are old-heavy meaning strain will come on pensions regardless of whether we go independent or not.

      I’m not pro-independence. I won’t vote for it but I won’t vote for the status quo either.

  3. The Midgies
    August 25, 2012 at 21:23

    “The pensions of 1 million Scots are guaranteed by the UK welfare system?” …

    Those pensions are paid for and guaranteed by Scottish tax revenues. This would not change in an independent Scotland.

    Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK:

    Scotland will be a fairer, wealthier country when we stop giving Westminster all our money only to receive a proportion of it back.

    As for embassies: Scotland will have embassies wherever she chooses. We’ll team up with our international friends to share embassies which is common practice. We already own 8.5 percent of all UK embassies for example. Time for UK to downsize 😉

    As for a seat at the G7 .. should anyone care about that? Most of the countries in the world do not have a seat at the G7 of course. Many of those countries are fairer and more successful than the UK.

  4. Al McIntosh
    August 25, 2012 at 23:58

    Scotland will have far more influence in the world as an independent nation. It will have more representation in the EU after independence and will gain its own seat at the UN in between Saudi Arabia and Senegal.

    As for the economic points, as an EU member state, Scotland can export anywhere inside the EU including the rump English state. That is unless the leaflet from the tory-led no campaign is saying England intends to withdraw from the EU? Do English Liberal Democrats realise that is what they are signing up to by backing the no campaign?

    If decisions on Scottish pensions are taken in Westminster, which is far more likely to be tory dominated, then they are at more risk of being reduced or raided than if the decisions on them are taken in Edinburgh.

    Liberal Democrats have an opportunity in this referendum to differentiate themselves from the tories but our leaders are instead choosing to support every negative scaremongering word of the tory-led no campaign.

    The danger is that a no vote is not just a vote for the status quo but is taken as a green light by English politicians of all parties to raid more of Scotland’s resources and repatriate powers. That may be why the no campaign dare not be clear about what a no vote will mean for Scotland’s future. Remember, constitutionally, without independence, we only have devolution in Scotland so long as it suits Westminster to allow it.

  5. August 26, 2012 at 09:10

    The OECD statistics show that the UK has an extremely low state pension relative to average earnings – 30.8% when the OECD average is 59%. Given that Scotland currently has a positive fiscal balance with the rest of the UK, and a generally social democratic political outlook – pensions will go UP after Independence. It’s a major reason for me, personally, intending to vote YES. http://www.oecd.org/els/pensionsystems/pensionsataglance2011retirement-incomesystemsinoecdandg20countries.htm

  6. tom hayes
    August 26, 2012 at 18:31

    Tory propoganda who remembers 79 vote no get better deal aye right we got thatchers anti Scottish policy and years off hell can only get worse time lab admitted they are putting Scots under future Tory rule.

  7. Scottish Banking Lie
    August 26, 2012 at 23:07

    I could forgive most of the stuff in those leaflets. After all they are simply campaigning for what they believe in.

    But bailing out the Scottish banks? This is not merely inaccurate, but a downright blatant lie. How many Scots are falling for this lie? Quite a lot I expect and I personally think that lies which have such longevity such as this one are the kind that will ultimately make people vote no in 2014.

    This lie must be challenged.

    ‘Scottish Banks’ have always existed under the union, have always been regulated by the UK and paid all taxes to the UK. By suggesting these banks are Scottish wrongfully implies that poor wee Scotland needed generous hand outs from others because us Scottish people couldn’t manage the banks properly, even though the Scottish people have NEVER had any say / control / influence over these UK banks anyway!

    Guys, never under estimate this one. It’s not going away any time soon even though it’s quite possibly the easiest lie to diffuse.

    This type of thing is the Golden Bullet of unionists who know all too well that a 10 second soundbyte heard by a lazy voter will give them the ‘NO’ in 2014.

  1. August 27, 2012 at 03:17
  2. August 28, 2012 at 08:00
  3. May 5, 2013 at 17:00
  4. May 5, 2013 at 23:44

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

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

%d bloggers like this: