Tweet
For the latest news from Scotland see our ScotNews feed at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/
Electric Scotland News
Which EU countries have the most citizens living in the UK?
We looked into this by checking the latest Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures, collected between January and December 2014 in its Population of the United Kingdom by Country of Birth and Nationality report.
They tell us that Polish nationals represent the largest group of EU nationals living in the UK overall, with 853,000 living in the UK.
The Irish were the second largest group, with 331,000 residing here. Romanian and Portuguese nationals are in joint third place, with 175,000 people from each country living in Britain.
These figures include only those who live in the UK long term: what the ONS calls the "usual resident population".
To count, people have to be living here for 12 months or more.
Those visiting for less than a year - for example those studying in the UK on a short course - would not be included.
In its report, the ONS defined nationality as "that stated by the respondent during the interview".
Italy, Spain and Greece - countries affected by the Eurozone crisis and high levels of unemployment - had 170,000, 131,000 and 54,000 respectively.
Thoughts on the EU Referendum
There is an excellent article on the Chokka Blog this week .
That said he doesn't cover some aspects as he's mostly focused on finance. I decided to add a comment to it which he allowed to be published and I'd recommend you follow the links I provided in my comments and if you do then I believe you will have enough information to make an informed decision. I really don't think you can just go by your gut on this referendum. So this is the best way to spend an hour reading this article and the ones I provide a link to as in my view the main media are by no means telling the whole story and often don't even mention alternatives if we should decide to leave.
The article concludes with him recommending we remain whereas I on the other hand recommend leave so on the whole a balanced report.
You can get to the article and my comments at:
http://chokkablog.blogspot.ca/2016/0...eferendum.html
Scottish News from this weeks newspapers
Note that this is a selection and more can be read in our ScotNews feed on our index page...
Scotland the Becalmed
The evidence is piling up of the economy being in trouble.
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...iness-36488460
Teachers call for probe into how Named Persons plan would work
Teachers have called for an investigation into the implications of the Named Person policy. Considering how overworked Teachers are and how many Doctor's are also overworked it seems to me that the Named Person's scheme will just add a whole new layer of work to them.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/educati...work-1-4151902
The Glasgow effect
We die young here - but you just get on with it
Read more at:
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...remature-death
Leave takes a 10-point lead in new poll
Leave has taken a 10-point lead over Remain, according to the latest poll by ORB.
Read more at:
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/...lead-new-poll/
Dundee High rector says families are paying to escape Curriculum for Excellence
In a damning verdict on the quality of education offered across the city, the rector of Dundee High School claimed they and their parents were being failed.
Read more at:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...um-excellence/
Hawick kicks off Common Riding season
A selection of images from Hawick as the season of Borders summer celebrations gets under way.
View pictures at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...tland-36516248
Scotland exceeds emissions targets
Scotland has exceeded a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 42% - six years early.
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...itics-36519506
Stirling plans to use water taxis to reconnect with River Forth
IT IS the city that slowly turned its back on the river that first made it prosperous.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/transpo...orth-1-4154283
Dundee University is one of Europe’s most innovative universities
Dundee University has been named as one of the top 20 most innovative universities in Europe, in a new ranking.
Read more at:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...-universities/
The humble daisy brings a smile to my face
South Uist The plant’s uses are many, but the sight of a sunlit field full of daisies is perhaps what we should value most
Read more at:
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-country-diary
Economic forecaster in recession warning
A leading economic forecaster has warned that Scotland may fail to avoid a recession in the coming months
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...iness-36532941
Remembering old St Andrews legends at the Home of Golf
Michael Alexander follows in the footsteps of some of St Andrews’ most famous golfing sons as Tommy’s Honour gets its world premiere at the Edinburgh International Film Festival.
Read more at:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...nds-home-golf/
North Coast 500 now possible by electric car
Rebecca Fretwell, of the trust, said such a trip would not have been possible a year ago.
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...lands-36547545
Ancient artwork reveal medieval use of social media
MEDIEVAL people used small works of art in the same way we use social media today
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/ancient...edia-1-4156739
Leave takes six point lead
The Leave campaign has a six point lead over Remain, according to a poll published a week ahead of the EU referendum. Note also that this story also contains a poll which at time of writing had 595 votes with Leave showing 64% to Remain 36%.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/eu-r...lead-1-4156634
Isle of Arran ‘best island for accommodation’ in Europe
Scotland’s isle of Arran has seen off competition from Mediterranean islands to be crowned the best European island for accommodation.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/regions/inve...rope-1-4156955
Electric Canadian
Upper Canada Sketches
By Thomas Conant (1898)
You can download this book at http://www.electriccanadian.com/pion...dasketches.pdf
Upper Canada Sketches
Incidents in the Early Times of the Province, by William Renwick Riddell (1922)
You can download this book at http://www.electriccanadian.com/pion...rcanadalaw.pdf
Electric Scotland
Life and Labours of Duncan Matheson
By the Rev. John MacPherson (1876).
Added a link to this book from his page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist.../chapter14.htm
Quiet Old Glasgow
Its Later Days Before Railways with Many other interesting matters giving a Pleasing Account of the Village of Grahamston, which was situate on that part of Argyle Street then known as Anderston Walk, By a Burgess of Glasgow (1893)
You can read this book at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/coun...oldglasgow.pdf
Privileged Characters
By M. R. Werner.
Not particularly to do with Scots but I enjoyed reading it and thought I'd share it with you especially as it records how Warren G. Harding became President of the United States.
You can read this book at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist...Privileged.pdf
Hylton Newsletter
Got in their June 2016 newsletter providing more of his stay in Caithness which you can read at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/fami...lton/index.htm
Royal Letters, Charters, and Tracts
Relating to the Colonization of New Scotland, and the Institution of The Order Of Knight Baronets of Nova Scotia 1621 - 1638. Added this volume to the foot of the page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/cana...novascotia.htm
Beth's Newfangled Family Tree
Got in section 2 of the July edition which you can read at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/bnft/index.htm
Highland Dancing Videos
Did an update on this page as I discovered the larger videos weren't displaying so I uploaded them to YouTuve and provided links to them.
You can view these at: http://www.electricscotland.com/dance/dances.htm
Memoir of Sir John Forbes
Medical surgeon in the Navy. I have added a link to this book to the Forbes entry in the Scottish Nation at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist...ion/forbes.htm
George M Mather M.D.
A neat little book with much of interest to read. I added this to our Hunter page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist...cal/hunter.htm
Leaves from the Buik of the West Kirke
By George Lorimer (1885) which I've added a link towards the foot of our Edinburgh page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/history/edinburgh/
Robert Burns Lives!
Edited by Frank Shaw
Memories of Muhammad Ali
This special article by volunteer manager Alison Wilson is about an experience of George Spence, a recent visitor at the Burns Museum in Alloway, Scotland. This story revolves around Muhammed Ali, one of the world’s most gifted boxers and proclaimed by many as the very best in the history of professional boxing. I have had two encounters with Muhammed Ali, once during the Kentucky Derby in 1984 and then again when he lit the flame to open the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. Ali has been indescribable since beating Sonny Liston (I listened to the fight on the radio) and went on to be a three-time holder on the heavyweight boxing championship, the first to ever accomplish this feat.
This is a narrative about Ali, George Spence who was a mere lad at the time, and Robert Burns, a heavy-weight championship holder in his own right when it comes to Scottish poetry and songs. After all, not many have written just one book only to have over 500 books written about him in return. I hope this story brings back many good memories to all of us. My thanks to David Hope, Alison Wilson, George Spence and the Burns Museum for allowing me to share this unique article about Ali sitting in Burns’ chair at the museum years ago in the presence of young George Spence. (FRS: 6.16.2016)
You can read this article at: http://www.electricscotland.com/fami...s_lives239.htm
The Price of Independence
A report from March 2016 which you can read at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/inde...ce_final_1.pdf
THE STORY
Letter to Dr. Franz Fischler 17 May 2003 from John J.G. McGill, FSA Scot.
Scotland-UN
25 Wallace View
Kilmarnock
KA1 4EN
Scotland
John J.G. McGill, FSA Scot.
Secretary,
The Scotland-UN Committee
Tel: (01563) 528 505
Email: jmcgill_fsa@elmsella.demon.co.uk
17 May 2003
Dr. Franz Fischler
Commissioner for Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development
Commission of the European Union
Brussels
Dear Commissioner Fischler,
The Scotland-UN Committee was established in 1979 as a national non-party think-tank and international action group for the purpose of having the ancient Scottish Parliament recalled. That objective having been successfully accomplished, the committee has been kept in existence in order to perform the same function in respect of other aspects of Scottish national affairs that call for international action. We have accordingly taken up the issue of the current fisheries crisis, at the request of some sectors of the industry as well as the relevant political actors. We append a copy of a paper we commissioned from two experts on an appropriate fisheries policy by the Scottish Government. This analysis was intended for domestic circulation within Scotland, and not for international use, but we send it for your information.
Our researches into the economic impact of the Common Fisheries Policy on the Scottish national economy have brought to light a scandal on a scale that is as horrifying as it is disgraceful. We can only assume that you are unaware of the extent of the economic devastation that the EU fisheries policy has caused in Scotland.
Scotland joined the European Economic Community in 1973 along with the other members of the British political union. Although the Scottish fishing industry represents three quarters of the United Kingdom industry, its affairs are conducted in Europe to this day largely by English politicians and administrators, who found no difficulty in “giving it away” as a bargaining counter on other unrelated issues. The well-conserved reserves of fish stocks in Scottish waters at first ran down only slowly under the increased pressures in a Community of nine members. The real deterioration began after 1975, and accelerated from around 1980. We therefore used 1975 as the baseline for the figures we published in the policy paper.
These show that, since joining the Common Fisheries Policy, the Scottish fishing fleet has been reduced by almost two thirds of its 1975 size – for no better reason than to “share the common resource” with other EU members. Since equality is ostensibly the raison d’etre behind this policy, perhaps you will be good enough inform us when you propose to reduce the Spanish and French fleets by the same proportion – two thirds - in order to solve the problem of too many boats chasing too few fish.
The figures we have given in the policy paper must be updated in one respect. In the light of the most recent decommissioning figures for 2003 available to us (177 boats), by the end of the year the Scottish fishing fleet will have been reduced to 668 boats of 10 metres and over in length, by comparison with 1,782 in 1975.
Using the same criterion as in the policy paper, i.e. average earnings over the past five years, the 1,114 vessels removed from the fleet over this period would each have earned more than £310,000 (€431,000) annually from some 330 tonnes of fish. As a direct result of the removal of this earning capacity (whether officially decommissioned or sold under economic pressure is irrelevant), the loss to the Scottish catching sector for boats of 10 metres and over is currently in excess of £345 million (€479 million) every year, with corresponding downstream effects on the vessel servicing industries and all the other recipients of domestic expenditure from crew wages.
This, of course, is not the full extent of the disaster, because fish processing, marketing, boat building and the other ancillary industries have all been hit by the loss of their supplies and their clients. The standard GDP impact ratio for fisheries is 2.35 times the landed price for fish. The identifiable loss to the Scottish national economy as a result of the catastrophic damage caused by the Common Fisheries Policy is therefore a minimum of £812 million (€1,128 million) every year in respect of vessels of 10 metres and over.
We must make it clear that these figures are minimum ones, since they are the only ones we could base on statistical information. It was impossible to obtain accurate statistics over the CFP period for coastal and inshore boats smaller than 10 metres, which we know have also been badly hit. A good deal of the known factors could not be quantified. Other economic fallout includes the cost to public funds of unemployment and other social benefits as well as broader economic consequences, including loss of tax income, and much more besides.
The current real loss to the Scottish economy arising from the reduction of the Scottish fishing fleet by around two thirds of its 1975 figure, as a result of the damage caused by the Common Fisheries Policy, must now be well in excess of £1,000 million (€1,389 million) every year. This exceeds by a huge margin any economic benefits Scotland receives from the European Union.
No country of five million people can stand an economic haemorrhage on this scale indefinitely, especially following on other euro-crimes like the “rationalisation” out of existence of the profitable and efficient Scottish steel industry, with knock-on effects on the famous Scottish shipbuilding industry (importing steel – not the lightest of materials – involves heavy transport oncosts, especially to an island location). On fishing policy, miniscule EU payments like decommissioning and retraining grants hardly appear in the balance against the costs to Scotland of what is nothing less than barefaced exploitation. We cannot conceive of any calculable benefits to Scotland of EU membership that can possibly compensate for this economic bloodletting.
To date we have seen no indication that this goal is likely to be achieved, least of all through the Commission’s published proposals for the reform of the CFP. We have studied these proposals with care and, notwithstanding several positive aspects, we find them totally inadequate both as a means of dealing with the current crisis and as a basis for a structure capable of ensuring long-term security for the fishing industry together with its downstream and ancillary industries and the communities dependent on it.
In our opinion, the proposals fail to demonstrate the kind of radical thinking that the situation demands. Furthermore, they bear no relation to good management or conservation, but are based purely and simply on the same mindless centralist ideology that has failed conspicuously over the past three decades, as it also did after 70 years of experience within the Soviet Union.
The first thing that has to be recognised as a fact – and there is no sign of any such awareness in the Commission’s proposals – is that the principle of opening all waters to all Community vessels without restriction is already dead. That mendacious ideology never had anything to do with management or conservation. These have at best been advanced as alibis to justify nationalist greed, mostly by member states that had already gutted their own waters by overfishing. The current state of cod stocks in the North Sea has shown where this policy has led, even in a period of transitional restrictions.
There is no sign here of any recognition by the Commission and Council of Fisheries Ministers that their record in this field has been one of abysmal, disastrous failure of a magnitude that, in the private sector, would result in the dismissal of an entire management and the drastic restructuring or winding up of the organisation concerned.
The positive aspects of the proposals have not been lost on us. For example, we approve of the proposals for regional fishing management structures for the transnational aspects of conservation and management, and especially of the predominance of practical fishermen in their membership, but we strongly object to their proposed status as “regional advisory committees”.
These bodies must not be subject to control from Brussels, but must be completely autonomous management authorities responsible only to the national governments whose waters they cover. Any such central control would be in conflict with the basic principles of federal government and in any case could serve no useful purpose, since Brussels would be totally dependent on the expertise and judgement of the regional authorities, who alone would be acquainted with local conditions.
We also note that the Commission’s proposals adopt the principle of priority of access to marine resources by local fishing interests, with outsiders being admitted only where resources surplus to sustainable local catching capacity are available. This perfectly reasonable principle has, however, been adopted only in respect of third states whose waters are fished by Community vessels. This same principle must now be applied by the Community internally, in respect of all Community waters out to the 200-mile or median limits.
Such positive examples apart, what concerns us is that the proposals ignore a number of factors that are of central importance if the future of any kind of viable fishing industry is to be guaranteed.
For example, with the exception of distant-water vessels, there is no justification for any EU member state maintaining a fishing fleet with a catching capacity that exceeds the renewable resources of its own territorial waters. Anything in excess of this is simply a means of preying on other members, to the detriment of employment there, with the resulting negative economic, social and cultural effects on fishing communities that Scotland has already experienced.
Furthermore, all member states must be forced to conserve the resources of their own waters – and if those waters are overfished (as is widely the case, especially in the southern EU member states), there can be no question of admitting that country’s fleet to the national waters of other members in order to compensate for its mismanagement.
In these respects it would be expedient for the EU to retain a police function, as well as for the regulation of distant-water fishing by Community vessels, in agreement with non-EU countries.
The worst offenders with grossly excessive capacities (meaning Spain in the first instance) must have their fleets reduced accordingly. We are sympathetic towards those countries that are experiencing problems of unemployment, with which we ourselves are not unacquainted. We would point out, however, that no treaty empowers the European Union to create unemployment in one member state in order to benefit employment in another. The present fisheries “policy” is therefore blatantly illegal in this respect. Not only must the policy itself be reversed; the adverse consequences that that policy has had for the Scottish national fishing industry must also be made good in their entirety.
Apart from such strategic functions the European Union definitely has no business to be involved in the direct management and conservation of fisheries – or indeed the direct management of any industry or economic sector! That is not a legitimate function of the Union! Its proven record in this respect is in any case one of unmitigated, disastrous failure.
Furthermore, there is no such thing as a homogeneous European fishing industry that would be capable of being managed on a central basis. There is therefore no way that such centralised management could possibly cope with the different conditions in an enlarged Community, with two dozen states fishing for a vast range of regionally unique commercial species in the Baltic, North Sea, Atlantic, Mediterranean, Adriatic and Black Seas, and with considerable divergences of local economic, social and cultural conditions and fish consumption patterns. Not even with the aid of regional “advisory” committees would it be possible to conduct such a system with any degree of homogeneity. The only answer here is the abolition of the CFP as such and the transfer of its powers back to where they belong at national and regional level.
Fishing is not a suitable area for European integration. Somewhere there must be limits to integration, and fishing has been proved by experience to be well beyond those limits. The European Union is overstretched here, and must confine its activities to those areas where integration is patently feasible.
The current disaster to fish stocks is not something that has “just happened”. There was never any problem of this nature before the involvement of the European Community in fishing. It is a direct result of the ideology of unrestricted freedom of access to all waters, and there will be no improvement until this purely ideological “policy” is abandoned and reversed.
Let nobody be under any illusions regarding the strength of feeling within the Scottish fishing industry and the country at large, where there has recently been an upsurge of sometimes virulent anti-EU feeling. Any talk of a “European Ideal” is regarded here as hypocritical whitewash. There is nothing whatever idealistic about the “European Ideal”. In practice, as applied to fishing, it has proved to be simply a tool of nationalist intrigue, with commercial interests running rampant at the cost of destroying centuries-old fishing communities.
We hold the European Commission and the Council of Fisheries Ministers entirely responsible for the disastrous decline of fish stocks and for the completely unnecessary rundown of our national fishing industry.
We hold the European Union responsible, not merely for compensating for this damage, but also for reversing its effects, leading to the systematically planned restoration of the Scottish fishing industry to its pre-1975 status as regards catching capacity and employment prospects. We expect you to publish a road map to this goal as soon as possible.
We observe a close parallel here to the attitude of the old guard of the Soviet system, who, after seven decades of obvious failure, were still protesting that their ideological centralist system was the right one and only needed time to prove itself. If this stubborn refusal by the European Commission and Council of Ministers to face up to the reality of the present untenable situation continues, then some kind of unilateral action will be necessary along the lines of that adopted by Iceland to protect its fisheries from being exhausted by foreign plundering.
We say this to the Commission and Council of Fisheries Ministers: You have cut a swathe of destruction through a fishing industry that had remained balanced and viable for centuries prior to your interference. You have devastated communities, you have caused immense misery and personal hardship to individuals and families, you have destroyed age-old cultures, and you have upset the entire ecological balance of the waters on which we depend for our livelihood. We have no faith in your competence, we have no faith in your intentions, and we have the deepest distrust of your motives.
We therefore have one simple message for “Europe”: Give Scotland the means to rectify the appalling ecological, environmental, economic and social havoc that your fisheries “policy” has caused here – and then get out of our lives!
There is another aspect of this orgy of mismanagement, incompetence and political corruption on which we must make our position clear: We have reason to believe that the United Kingdom government representatives have been using the fishing industry as a bargaining counter in EU-internal and other negotiations. Let us make it abundantly clear that the Scottish fishing industry is not going to be used as a trade-off in order to buy negotiating concessions in other unrelated fields. We hereby reject and disavow absolutely any and all steps that the United Kingdom representatives have taken along these lines from the basic EEC entry negotiations right to the present day as well as any that may be taken in the future. We regard all such agreements on fishing that have been taken without the consent of the Scottish fishing industry and the Scottish Parliament as invalid, and we refuse to consider Scotland bound by them. We regard any collusion along these lines by the United Kingdom government with any other member state, or with the Community as a whole, as an illegal action that also renders the negotiators personally responsible for the consequential losses suffered by the fishing communities.
In this connection we have noted the circumstances surrounding the replacement of the previous Fisheries General Director after verbal representations by the Spanish Prime Minister to the Commission President.
We must also make it clear that, in stating the above, we are not adopting a purely negative approach to the European Union or to the integration process as a whole. In the light of international developments over the past few decades, with the emergence of global and regional structures, we accept the necessity of European integration in specific areas where it is clearly appropriate as a means of guaranteeing the maintenance of good governance.
Fishing, however, is not one of those areas, as has been proved by the disastrous developments over the past 30 years. Integration here has had an entirely negative effect without a single redeeming feature. It has proved to be the reverse of good governance, and in the case of Scotland it has destroyed a conservation balance that had previously been maintained for centuries. Three decades is long enough to prove that this brainless ideology does not work and can never work.
There is only one answer to this situation: With the exception of the strategic police functions mentioned above, control of fishing must be returned to national governments and regional fishing councils. National fleets, with catching capacities balanced in relation to their own sustainable national resources, must normally be restricted to fishing their own waters, with special licences to fish in other national waters being subject to the availability of marine resources there that are surplus to the sustainable catching capacities of the local fishing fleets.
The Scottish elections on 1 May 2003 resulted in the return of an unprecedented number of members of the Scottish Parliament committed to full independence. Three of the political parties represented there have adopted constitutional independence as a main policy goal, and it is a strong theme running through the remainder, including the non-party independent members. Scotland is presently a member of two political unions, British and European, but - largely as a reaction to the fisheries policy that you are pursuing - it may well secede from both unions within the foreseeable future. You have it in your power to influence such a course of events one way or the other.
We will not have to emphasise that, since around one third of the fish resources in the North-East Atlantic and North Sea fall within the Scottish legal jurisdiction, this would effectively mean the end of the Common Fisheries Policy. There is no such thing as a British or United Kingdom legal jurisdiction over those resources (we suspect that you may have been misled on this point), since under the terms of the Treaty of Union between Scotland and England the Scottish and English legal jurisdictions remain entirely independent of each other.
We would point out particularly in this connection that Scotland’s opinion has never been invited on the question of open access to its national waters.
The initiative therefore lies in your hands. We in Scotland have come to the end of our patience – and of our tolerance. There can be no question of leaving the matter in its present state. We are not interested in half measures like the useless tinkering with the CFP that you are presently proposing. There must be a planned and incisive restoration of the Scottish fishing industry to its pre-1975 capacity and status. The European Community has caused the damage, and the European Community must bear the burden of restoration. We look forward to hearing your proposals to this end.
For and on behalf of the Scotland-UN Committee,
John J.G. McGill, FSA Scot.
And that's it for this week and hope you all enjoy your weekend.
Alastair
http://www.electricscotland.com/
Electric Scotland News
Which EU countries have the most citizens living in the UK?
We looked into this by checking the latest Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures, collected between January and December 2014 in its Population of the United Kingdom by Country of Birth and Nationality report.
They tell us that Polish nationals represent the largest group of EU nationals living in the UK overall, with 853,000 living in the UK.
The Irish were the second largest group, with 331,000 residing here. Romanian and Portuguese nationals are in joint third place, with 175,000 people from each country living in Britain.
These figures include only those who live in the UK long term: what the ONS calls the "usual resident population".
To count, people have to be living here for 12 months or more.
Those visiting for less than a year - for example those studying in the UK on a short course - would not be included.
In its report, the ONS defined nationality as "that stated by the respondent during the interview".
Italy, Spain and Greece - countries affected by the Eurozone crisis and high levels of unemployment - had 170,000, 131,000 and 54,000 respectively.
Thoughts on the EU Referendum
There is an excellent article on the Chokka Blog this week .
That said he doesn't cover some aspects as he's mostly focused on finance. I decided to add a comment to it which he allowed to be published and I'd recommend you follow the links I provided in my comments and if you do then I believe you will have enough information to make an informed decision. I really don't think you can just go by your gut on this referendum. So this is the best way to spend an hour reading this article and the ones I provide a link to as in my view the main media are by no means telling the whole story and often don't even mention alternatives if we should decide to leave.
The article concludes with him recommending we remain whereas I on the other hand recommend leave so on the whole a balanced report.
You can get to the article and my comments at:
http://chokkablog.blogspot.ca/2016/0...eferendum.html
Scottish News from this weeks newspapers
Note that this is a selection and more can be read in our ScotNews feed on our index page...
Scotland the Becalmed
The evidence is piling up of the economy being in trouble.
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...iness-36488460
Teachers call for probe into how Named Persons plan would work
Teachers have called for an investigation into the implications of the Named Person policy. Considering how overworked Teachers are and how many Doctor's are also overworked it seems to me that the Named Person's scheme will just add a whole new layer of work to them.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/educati...work-1-4151902
The Glasgow effect
We die young here - but you just get on with it
Read more at:
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...remature-death
Leave takes a 10-point lead in new poll
Leave has taken a 10-point lead over Remain, according to the latest poll by ORB.
Read more at:
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/...lead-new-poll/
Dundee High rector says families are paying to escape Curriculum for Excellence
In a damning verdict on the quality of education offered across the city, the rector of Dundee High School claimed they and their parents were being failed.
Read more at:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...um-excellence/
Hawick kicks off Common Riding season
A selection of images from Hawick as the season of Borders summer celebrations gets under way.
View pictures at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...tland-36516248
Scotland exceeds emissions targets
Scotland has exceeded a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 42% - six years early.
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...itics-36519506
Stirling plans to use water taxis to reconnect with River Forth
IT IS the city that slowly turned its back on the river that first made it prosperous.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/transpo...orth-1-4154283
Dundee University is one of Europe’s most innovative universities
Dundee University has been named as one of the top 20 most innovative universities in Europe, in a new ranking.
Read more at:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...-universities/
The humble daisy brings a smile to my face
South Uist The plant’s uses are many, but the sight of a sunlit field full of daisies is perhaps what we should value most
Read more at:
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-country-diary
Economic forecaster in recession warning
A leading economic forecaster has warned that Scotland may fail to avoid a recession in the coming months
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...iness-36532941
Remembering old St Andrews legends at the Home of Golf
Michael Alexander follows in the footsteps of some of St Andrews’ most famous golfing sons as Tommy’s Honour gets its world premiere at the Edinburgh International Film Festival.
Read more at:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...nds-home-golf/
North Coast 500 now possible by electric car
Rebecca Fretwell, of the trust, said such a trip would not have been possible a year ago.
Read more at:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...lands-36547545
Ancient artwork reveal medieval use of social media
MEDIEVAL people used small works of art in the same way we use social media today
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/ancient...edia-1-4156739
Leave takes six point lead
The Leave campaign has a six point lead over Remain, according to a poll published a week ahead of the EU referendum. Note also that this story also contains a poll which at time of writing had 595 votes with Leave showing 64% to Remain 36%.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/eu-r...lead-1-4156634
Isle of Arran ‘best island for accommodation’ in Europe
Scotland’s isle of Arran has seen off competition from Mediterranean islands to be crowned the best European island for accommodation.
Read more at:
http://www.scotsman.com/regions/inve...rope-1-4156955
Electric Canadian
Upper Canada Sketches
By Thomas Conant (1898)
You can download this book at http://www.electriccanadian.com/pion...dasketches.pdf
Upper Canada Sketches
Incidents in the Early Times of the Province, by William Renwick Riddell (1922)
You can download this book at http://www.electriccanadian.com/pion...rcanadalaw.pdf
Electric Scotland
Life and Labours of Duncan Matheson
By the Rev. John MacPherson (1876).
Added a link to this book from his page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist.../chapter14.htm
Quiet Old Glasgow
Its Later Days Before Railways with Many other interesting matters giving a Pleasing Account of the Village of Grahamston, which was situate on that part of Argyle Street then known as Anderston Walk, By a Burgess of Glasgow (1893)
You can read this book at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/coun...oldglasgow.pdf
Privileged Characters
By M. R. Werner.
Not particularly to do with Scots but I enjoyed reading it and thought I'd share it with you especially as it records how Warren G. Harding became President of the United States.
You can read this book at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist...Privileged.pdf
Hylton Newsletter
Got in their June 2016 newsletter providing more of his stay in Caithness which you can read at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/fami...lton/index.htm
Royal Letters, Charters, and Tracts
Relating to the Colonization of New Scotland, and the Institution of The Order Of Knight Baronets of Nova Scotia 1621 - 1638. Added this volume to the foot of the page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/cana...novascotia.htm
Beth's Newfangled Family Tree
Got in section 2 of the July edition which you can read at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/bnft/index.htm
Highland Dancing Videos
Did an update on this page as I discovered the larger videos weren't displaying so I uploaded them to YouTuve and provided links to them.
You can view these at: http://www.electricscotland.com/dance/dances.htm
Memoir of Sir John Forbes
Medical surgeon in the Navy. I have added a link to this book to the Forbes entry in the Scottish Nation at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist...ion/forbes.htm
George M Mather M.D.
A neat little book with much of interest to read. I added this to our Hunter page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/hist...cal/hunter.htm
Leaves from the Buik of the West Kirke
By George Lorimer (1885) which I've added a link towards the foot of our Edinburgh page at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/history/edinburgh/
Robert Burns Lives!
Edited by Frank Shaw
Memories of Muhammad Ali
This special article by volunteer manager Alison Wilson is about an experience of George Spence, a recent visitor at the Burns Museum in Alloway, Scotland. This story revolves around Muhammed Ali, one of the world’s most gifted boxers and proclaimed by many as the very best in the history of professional boxing. I have had two encounters with Muhammed Ali, once during the Kentucky Derby in 1984 and then again when he lit the flame to open the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. Ali has been indescribable since beating Sonny Liston (I listened to the fight on the radio) and went on to be a three-time holder on the heavyweight boxing championship, the first to ever accomplish this feat.
This is a narrative about Ali, George Spence who was a mere lad at the time, and Robert Burns, a heavy-weight championship holder in his own right when it comes to Scottish poetry and songs. After all, not many have written just one book only to have over 500 books written about him in return. I hope this story brings back many good memories to all of us. My thanks to David Hope, Alison Wilson, George Spence and the Burns Museum for allowing me to share this unique article about Ali sitting in Burns’ chair at the museum years ago in the presence of young George Spence. (FRS: 6.16.2016)
You can read this article at: http://www.electricscotland.com/fami...s_lives239.htm
The Price of Independence
A report from March 2016 which you can read at:
http://www.electricscotland.com/inde...ce_final_1.pdf
THE STORY
Letter to Dr. Franz Fischler 17 May 2003 from John J.G. McGill, FSA Scot.
Scotland-UN
25 Wallace View
Kilmarnock
KA1 4EN
Scotland
John J.G. McGill, FSA Scot.
Secretary,
The Scotland-UN Committee
Tel: (01563) 528 505
Email: jmcgill_fsa@elmsella.demon.co.uk
17 May 2003
Dr. Franz Fischler
Commissioner for Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development
Commission of the European Union
Brussels
Dear Commissioner Fischler,
The Scotland-UN Committee was established in 1979 as a national non-party think-tank and international action group for the purpose of having the ancient Scottish Parliament recalled. That objective having been successfully accomplished, the committee has been kept in existence in order to perform the same function in respect of other aspects of Scottish national affairs that call for international action. We have accordingly taken up the issue of the current fisheries crisis, at the request of some sectors of the industry as well as the relevant political actors. We append a copy of a paper we commissioned from two experts on an appropriate fisheries policy by the Scottish Government. This analysis was intended for domestic circulation within Scotland, and not for international use, but we send it for your information.
Our researches into the economic impact of the Common Fisheries Policy on the Scottish national economy have brought to light a scandal on a scale that is as horrifying as it is disgraceful. We can only assume that you are unaware of the extent of the economic devastation that the EU fisheries policy has caused in Scotland.
Scotland joined the European Economic Community in 1973 along with the other members of the British political union. Although the Scottish fishing industry represents three quarters of the United Kingdom industry, its affairs are conducted in Europe to this day largely by English politicians and administrators, who found no difficulty in “giving it away” as a bargaining counter on other unrelated issues. The well-conserved reserves of fish stocks in Scottish waters at first ran down only slowly under the increased pressures in a Community of nine members. The real deterioration began after 1975, and accelerated from around 1980. We therefore used 1975 as the baseline for the figures we published in the policy paper.
These show that, since joining the Common Fisheries Policy, the Scottish fishing fleet has been reduced by almost two thirds of its 1975 size – for no better reason than to “share the common resource” with other EU members. Since equality is ostensibly the raison d’etre behind this policy, perhaps you will be good enough inform us when you propose to reduce the Spanish and French fleets by the same proportion – two thirds - in order to solve the problem of too many boats chasing too few fish.
The figures we have given in the policy paper must be updated in one respect. In the light of the most recent decommissioning figures for 2003 available to us (177 boats), by the end of the year the Scottish fishing fleet will have been reduced to 668 boats of 10 metres and over in length, by comparison with 1,782 in 1975.
Using the same criterion as in the policy paper, i.e. average earnings over the past five years, the 1,114 vessels removed from the fleet over this period would each have earned more than £310,000 (€431,000) annually from some 330 tonnes of fish. As a direct result of the removal of this earning capacity (whether officially decommissioned or sold under economic pressure is irrelevant), the loss to the Scottish catching sector for boats of 10 metres and over is currently in excess of £345 million (€479 million) every year, with corresponding downstream effects on the vessel servicing industries and all the other recipients of domestic expenditure from crew wages.
This, of course, is not the full extent of the disaster, because fish processing, marketing, boat building and the other ancillary industries have all been hit by the loss of their supplies and their clients. The standard GDP impact ratio for fisheries is 2.35 times the landed price for fish. The identifiable loss to the Scottish national economy as a result of the catastrophic damage caused by the Common Fisheries Policy is therefore a minimum of £812 million (€1,128 million) every year in respect of vessels of 10 metres and over.
We must make it clear that these figures are minimum ones, since they are the only ones we could base on statistical information. It was impossible to obtain accurate statistics over the CFP period for coastal and inshore boats smaller than 10 metres, which we know have also been badly hit. A good deal of the known factors could not be quantified. Other economic fallout includes the cost to public funds of unemployment and other social benefits as well as broader economic consequences, including loss of tax income, and much more besides.
The current real loss to the Scottish economy arising from the reduction of the Scottish fishing fleet by around two thirds of its 1975 figure, as a result of the damage caused by the Common Fisheries Policy, must now be well in excess of £1,000 million (€1,389 million) every year. This exceeds by a huge margin any economic benefits Scotland receives from the European Union.
No country of five million people can stand an economic haemorrhage on this scale indefinitely, especially following on other euro-crimes like the “rationalisation” out of existence of the profitable and efficient Scottish steel industry, with knock-on effects on the famous Scottish shipbuilding industry (importing steel – not the lightest of materials – involves heavy transport oncosts, especially to an island location). On fishing policy, miniscule EU payments like decommissioning and retraining grants hardly appear in the balance against the costs to Scotland of what is nothing less than barefaced exploitation. We cannot conceive of any calculable benefits to Scotland of EU membership that can possibly compensate for this economic bloodletting.
* * * * *
This is clearly not the kind of Europe that was envisaged by Robert Schumann, Jean Monnet or Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi – Europe as a piratical oppressor and plunderer of its people’s national resources. The situation is clearly grossly unjust, and we have a right to know what you intend to do to compensate and to restore the Scottish fishing industry to its previous economically healthy size and status.To date we have seen no indication that this goal is likely to be achieved, least of all through the Commission’s published proposals for the reform of the CFP. We have studied these proposals with care and, notwithstanding several positive aspects, we find them totally inadequate both as a means of dealing with the current crisis and as a basis for a structure capable of ensuring long-term security for the fishing industry together with its downstream and ancillary industries and the communities dependent on it.
In our opinion, the proposals fail to demonstrate the kind of radical thinking that the situation demands. Furthermore, they bear no relation to good management or conservation, but are based purely and simply on the same mindless centralist ideology that has failed conspicuously over the past three decades, as it also did after 70 years of experience within the Soviet Union.
The first thing that has to be recognised as a fact – and there is no sign of any such awareness in the Commission’s proposals – is that the principle of opening all waters to all Community vessels without restriction is already dead. That mendacious ideology never had anything to do with management or conservation. These have at best been advanced as alibis to justify nationalist greed, mostly by member states that had already gutted their own waters by overfishing. The current state of cod stocks in the North Sea has shown where this policy has led, even in a period of transitional restrictions.
There is no sign here of any recognition by the Commission and Council of Fisheries Ministers that their record in this field has been one of abysmal, disastrous failure of a magnitude that, in the private sector, would result in the dismissal of an entire management and the drastic restructuring or winding up of the organisation concerned.
The positive aspects of the proposals have not been lost on us. For example, we approve of the proposals for regional fishing management structures for the transnational aspects of conservation and management, and especially of the predominance of practical fishermen in their membership, but we strongly object to their proposed status as “regional advisory committees”.
These bodies must not be subject to control from Brussels, but must be completely autonomous management authorities responsible only to the national governments whose waters they cover. Any such central control would be in conflict with the basic principles of federal government and in any case could serve no useful purpose, since Brussels would be totally dependent on the expertise and judgement of the regional authorities, who alone would be acquainted with local conditions.
We also note that the Commission’s proposals adopt the principle of priority of access to marine resources by local fishing interests, with outsiders being admitted only where resources surplus to sustainable local catching capacity are available. This perfectly reasonable principle has, however, been adopted only in respect of third states whose waters are fished by Community vessels. This same principle must now be applied by the Community internally, in respect of all Community waters out to the 200-mile or median limits.
Such positive examples apart, what concerns us is that the proposals ignore a number of factors that are of central importance if the future of any kind of viable fishing industry is to be guaranteed.
For example, with the exception of distant-water vessels, there is no justification for any EU member state maintaining a fishing fleet with a catching capacity that exceeds the renewable resources of its own territorial waters. Anything in excess of this is simply a means of preying on other members, to the detriment of employment there, with the resulting negative economic, social and cultural effects on fishing communities that Scotland has already experienced.
Furthermore, all member states must be forced to conserve the resources of their own waters – and if those waters are overfished (as is widely the case, especially in the southern EU member states), there can be no question of admitting that country’s fleet to the national waters of other members in order to compensate for its mismanagement.
In these respects it would be expedient for the EU to retain a police function, as well as for the regulation of distant-water fishing by Community vessels, in agreement with non-EU countries.
The worst offenders with grossly excessive capacities (meaning Spain in the first instance) must have their fleets reduced accordingly. We are sympathetic towards those countries that are experiencing problems of unemployment, with which we ourselves are not unacquainted. We would point out, however, that no treaty empowers the European Union to create unemployment in one member state in order to benefit employment in another. The present fisheries “policy” is therefore blatantly illegal in this respect. Not only must the policy itself be reversed; the adverse consequences that that policy has had for the Scottish national fishing industry must also be made good in their entirety.
Apart from such strategic functions the European Union definitely has no business to be involved in the direct management and conservation of fisheries – or indeed the direct management of any industry or economic sector! That is not a legitimate function of the Union! Its proven record in this respect is in any case one of unmitigated, disastrous failure.
Furthermore, there is no such thing as a homogeneous European fishing industry that would be capable of being managed on a central basis. There is therefore no way that such centralised management could possibly cope with the different conditions in an enlarged Community, with two dozen states fishing for a vast range of regionally unique commercial species in the Baltic, North Sea, Atlantic, Mediterranean, Adriatic and Black Seas, and with considerable divergences of local economic, social and cultural conditions and fish consumption patterns. Not even with the aid of regional “advisory” committees would it be possible to conduct such a system with any degree of homogeneity. The only answer here is the abolition of the CFP as such and the transfer of its powers back to where they belong at national and regional level.
Fishing is not a suitable area for European integration. Somewhere there must be limits to integration, and fishing has been proved by experience to be well beyond those limits. The European Union is overstretched here, and must confine its activities to those areas where integration is patently feasible.
The current disaster to fish stocks is not something that has “just happened”. There was never any problem of this nature before the involvement of the European Community in fishing. It is a direct result of the ideology of unrestricted freedom of access to all waters, and there will be no improvement until this purely ideological “policy” is abandoned and reversed.
Let nobody be under any illusions regarding the strength of feeling within the Scottish fishing industry and the country at large, where there has recently been an upsurge of sometimes virulent anti-EU feeling. Any talk of a “European Ideal” is regarded here as hypocritical whitewash. There is nothing whatever idealistic about the “European Ideal”. In practice, as applied to fishing, it has proved to be simply a tool of nationalist intrigue, with commercial interests running rampant at the cost of destroying centuries-old fishing communities.
We hold the European Commission and the Council of Fisheries Ministers entirely responsible for the disastrous decline of fish stocks and for the completely unnecessary rundown of our national fishing industry.
We hold the European Union responsible, not merely for compensating for this damage, but also for reversing its effects, leading to the systematically planned restoration of the Scottish fishing industry to its pre-1975 status as regards catching capacity and employment prospects. We expect you to publish a road map to this goal as soon as possible.
We observe a close parallel here to the attitude of the old guard of the Soviet system, who, after seven decades of obvious failure, were still protesting that their ideological centralist system was the right one and only needed time to prove itself. If this stubborn refusal by the European Commission and Council of Ministers to face up to the reality of the present untenable situation continues, then some kind of unilateral action will be necessary along the lines of that adopted by Iceland to protect its fisheries from being exhausted by foreign plundering.
We say this to the Commission and Council of Fisheries Ministers: You have cut a swathe of destruction through a fishing industry that had remained balanced and viable for centuries prior to your interference. You have devastated communities, you have caused immense misery and personal hardship to individuals and families, you have destroyed age-old cultures, and you have upset the entire ecological balance of the waters on which we depend for our livelihood. We have no faith in your competence, we have no faith in your intentions, and we have the deepest distrust of your motives.
We therefore have one simple message for “Europe”: Give Scotland the means to rectify the appalling ecological, environmental, economic and social havoc that your fisheries “policy” has caused here – and then get out of our lives!
There is another aspect of this orgy of mismanagement, incompetence and political corruption on which we must make our position clear: We have reason to believe that the United Kingdom government representatives have been using the fishing industry as a bargaining counter in EU-internal and other negotiations. Let us make it abundantly clear that the Scottish fishing industry is not going to be used as a trade-off in order to buy negotiating concessions in other unrelated fields. We hereby reject and disavow absolutely any and all steps that the United Kingdom representatives have taken along these lines from the basic EEC entry negotiations right to the present day as well as any that may be taken in the future. We regard all such agreements on fishing that have been taken without the consent of the Scottish fishing industry and the Scottish Parliament as invalid, and we refuse to consider Scotland bound by them. We regard any collusion along these lines by the United Kingdom government with any other member state, or with the Community as a whole, as an illegal action that also renders the negotiators personally responsible for the consequential losses suffered by the fishing communities.
In this connection we have noted the circumstances surrounding the replacement of the previous Fisheries General Director after verbal representations by the Spanish Prime Minister to the Commission President.
We must also make it clear that, in stating the above, we are not adopting a purely negative approach to the European Union or to the integration process as a whole. In the light of international developments over the past few decades, with the emergence of global and regional structures, we accept the necessity of European integration in specific areas where it is clearly appropriate as a means of guaranteeing the maintenance of good governance.
Fishing, however, is not one of those areas, as has been proved by the disastrous developments over the past 30 years. Integration here has had an entirely negative effect without a single redeeming feature. It has proved to be the reverse of good governance, and in the case of Scotland it has destroyed a conservation balance that had previously been maintained for centuries. Three decades is long enough to prove that this brainless ideology does not work and can never work.
There is only one answer to this situation: With the exception of the strategic police functions mentioned above, control of fishing must be returned to national governments and regional fishing councils. National fleets, with catching capacities balanced in relation to their own sustainable national resources, must normally be restricted to fishing their own waters, with special licences to fish in other national waters being subject to the availability of marine resources there that are surplus to the sustainable catching capacities of the local fishing fleets.
* * * * *
Time is running out for the EU on this issue. We intend to pursue this matter with the Intergovernmental Conference in 2004, but at the same time we must make it clear that matters may be taken out of the hands of the European Union. Separatism is not a viable political option nowadays, and there is no question of Scotland attempting to exist in isolation outside the European structures. Having made that clear, however, we have recommended to all of the Scottish political parties that, on the resumption of constitutional independence, Scotland should withdraw from the European Union and participate in European affairs through membership of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the European Economic Area (EEA), thereby giving it the same status as the fishing countries Iceland and Norway. The Scottish elections on 1 May 2003 resulted in the return of an unprecedented number of members of the Scottish Parliament committed to full independence. Three of the political parties represented there have adopted constitutional independence as a main policy goal, and it is a strong theme running through the remainder, including the non-party independent members. Scotland is presently a member of two political unions, British and European, but - largely as a reaction to the fisheries policy that you are pursuing - it may well secede from both unions within the foreseeable future. You have it in your power to influence such a course of events one way or the other.
We will not have to emphasise that, since around one third of the fish resources in the North-East Atlantic and North Sea fall within the Scottish legal jurisdiction, this would effectively mean the end of the Common Fisheries Policy. There is no such thing as a British or United Kingdom legal jurisdiction over those resources (we suspect that you may have been misled on this point), since under the terms of the Treaty of Union between Scotland and England the Scottish and English legal jurisdictions remain entirely independent of each other.
We would point out particularly in this connection that Scotland’s opinion has never been invited on the question of open access to its national waters.
The initiative therefore lies in your hands. We in Scotland have come to the end of our patience – and of our tolerance. There can be no question of leaving the matter in its present state. We are not interested in half measures like the useless tinkering with the CFP that you are presently proposing. There must be a planned and incisive restoration of the Scottish fishing industry to its pre-1975 capacity and status. The European Community has caused the damage, and the European Community must bear the burden of restoration. We look forward to hearing your proposals to this end.
For and on behalf of the Scotland-UN Committee,
John J.G. McGill, FSA Scot.
And that's it for this week and hope you all enjoy your weekend.
Alastair