DOCSLIB.ORG

Referendum (Scotland) Bill Committee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Referendum (Scotland) Bill Committee REFERENDUM (SCOTLAND) BILL COMMITTEE Thursday 30 May 2013 Session 4 © Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Information on the Scottish Parliament’s copyright policy can be found on the website - www.scottish.parliament.uk or by contacting Public Information on 0131 348 5000 Thursday 30 May 2013 CONTENTS Col. SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM BILL: STAGE 1 ................................................................................. 465 REFERENDUM (SCOTLAND) BILL COMMITTEE 15th Meeting 2013, Session 4 CONVENER *Bruce Crawford (Stirling) (SNP) DEPUTY CONVENER *James Kelly (Rutherglen) (Lab) COMMITTEE MEMBERS *Annabelle Ewing (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP) Linda Fabiani (East Kilbride) (SNP) *Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab) *Rob Gibson (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) *Annabel Goldie (West Scotland) (Con) *Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green) *Stewart Maxwell (West Scotland) (SNP) *Stuart McMillan (West Scotland) (SNP) *Tavish Scott (Shetland Islands) (LD) *attended THE FOLLOWING ALSO PARTICIPATED: Colin Borland (Federation of Small Businesses) Dennis Canavan (Yes Scotland) John Downie (Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations) Craig Harrow (Better Together) Blair Jenkins (Yes Scotland) Bill Kidd (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) (Committee Substitute) Blair McDougall (Better Together) Professor Aileen McHarg (University of Strathclyde) Euan Page (Equality and Human Rights Commission) Bill Scott (Inclusion Scotland) Kyle Thornton (Scottish Youth Parliament) CLERK TO THE COMMITTEE Andrew Mylne LOCATION Committee Room 1 465 30 MAY 2013 466 process. I hand over to Dennis Canavan for his Scottish Parliament remarks. Referendum (Scotland) Bill Dennis Canavan (Yes Scotland): Convener, thank you for inviting us. I chair the advisory board Committee of Yes Scotland, which consists of about a dozen members from various backgrounds such as Thursday 30 May 2013 politics, the business community, media and entertainment. Yes Scotland is a broad-based, [The Convener opened the meeting at 09:15] inclusive organisation, and that is reflected in the membership of our advisory board, which includes Scottish Independence people from different political parties and people Referendum Bill: Stage 1 who are not members of any political party. We are more of an advisory committee than an The Convener (Bruce Crawford): I remind executive committee. Our job is to advise the chief everyone to switch off their mobile phones. We executive and the management team on matters have had apologies from Linda Fabiani, and Bill about the yes Scotland campaign. I look forward to Kidd is attending in her place. Stuart McMillan has this evidence session. to leave after the first panel for a private Craig Harrow (Better Together): Convener, I engagement. thank you and the committee for inviting my Patrick Harvie wants to say something at this colleague Blair McDougall and me along this stage. morning. On behalf of Better Together, we welcome the opportunity to give evidence to the Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green): Convener, I committee. The rules and regulations governing do not think that this is a formal registrable any electoral contest are, of course, important but interest, and I do not think that it will come as a they are of heightened importance in a once-in-a- surprise to committee members, but in the interest lifetime referendum on an irreversible decision of transparency I put it on the record that I am a such as dissolving a 300-year-old union. We all member of the advisory board of Yes Scotland. have a duty to ensure that we deliver a result that The Convener: Thank you. is not only fair but seen to be fair. This is the fourth of the five meetings in which For our part, we have striven to act in a the committee will take oral evidence at stage 1 of transparent manner. We supported the the Scottish Independence Referendum Bill. I involvement of the Electoral Commission and its welcome the first panel of witnesses. From Yes rules as a matter of principle from the outset. Scotland we have Dennis Canavan, who is the Better Together was the first campaign to release chair of the advisory board, and Blair Jenkins details of our donors and we have decided not OBE, who is the chief executive. From Better only to meet the normal standards of electoral law Together we have Blair McDougall, campaign but to go further by banning any foreign donations director, and Craig Harrow, the director. I to our campaign. Better Together considers the understand that Blair Jenkins and Craig Harrow sensible recommendations from the Electoral would like to make short opening statements, and Commission to be a big step forward in ensuring Dennis Canavan wants to say something after that we have fair referendum rules. As the they have both had the chance to say their piece. committee would expect, we have followed its discussions and we are pleased that the work Blair Jenkins (Yes Scotland): Thank you, continues to ensure that the process of the convener. It is a great pleasure to be here this referendum is properly scrutinised. morning. As you say, Dennis Canavan will talk a little bit about Yes Scotland’s advisory board. We have been particularly interested in the discussions about permitted participants. It is We are delighted to be taking part in this important to us that dummy organisations are not process. We share the aspiration of every member established and that campaigning groups properly of the committee that we should have a good account for expenditure in the regulated period. referendum process. We are acutely aware of the We want to ensure that there is clarity on which historical importance of the referendum for groups are formal accounting units of our Scotland and the Scottish people. We are organisation. In that way, regulators and the media determined to run the kind of positive campaign will know which organisations are part of Better that will engage and enthuse people in Scotland, Together for the purposes of recording and I am sure that that aspiration, again, is shared expenditure and which are not and so would be by all members of the committee and both considered as other participants. In simple terms, campaigns. We are pleased to be part of this we are operating one accounting unit. In other words, our women’s; lesbian, gay, bisexual and 467 30 MAY 2013 468 transgender; rural; youth; business; and trade The Convener: Okay. I needed to put that on union groups will not set up separate bank the record, because concerns have been raised in accounts or separate funding vehicles. We are evidence, particularly given the experience in happy to discuss that issue or any other issue with Wales. I am glad that you have clarified matters. the committee. James Kelly (Rutherglen) (Lab): I thank the The Convener: Thank you, Craig. witnesses for coming to the meeting to give us evidence. I want to ask both campaign groups about an issue that has arisen during our evidence taking— I note from your earlier comments that your the situation that arose in Wales, where only one organisations intend to be the lead organisations body decided to define itself as a designated for each side of the argument. I think that that organisation. My question is simple. Do you intend makes great sense. It will place a great to apply for designated organisation status? Are responsibility on you in relation to how you there any circumstances in which you would conduct the campaigns and how you account for envisage not applying for that status? your expenditure. It is clear that there is a limit of £1.5 million for each lead organisation, and within Blair Jenkins: We will certainly apply to be the that you will have to account for each item of designated campaign organisation campaigning expenditure over £200. That will be a major for the yes vote. In fact, we would welcome early operation for each campaign. What accounting designation as the official yes campaign policies and practices will you put in place to organisation. ensure that that is done correctly and in Blair McDougall (Better Together): Absolutely. compliance with the regulations? I cannot envisage any circumstances in which we Blair McDougall: On the steps that we have would not seek to be the designated official taken, we have tried to ensure that there is clarity organisation. Indeed, Blair Jenkins and I talked on which organisations are part of Better Together outside about our wish to have early designation, if for accounting purposes so that there is also possible, so that everybody is clear about where clarity on which organisations are not part of it. It is both campaigns stand. clear that the issues around permitted participants The Convener: You both talked about early and co-ordination arise from the issue of an designation. What do you mean by that? organisation being separate for the purposes of the overall amount of money that it is allowed to Blair McDougall: In theory, designation will be spend, but then being co-ordinated with the main a short time before the start of the regulated organisation. Notwithstanding the cross-party period, in June. I think that the Electoral nature of things and the individual parties having Commission has expressed an interest in looking their own spending limits, we are trying to give at whether early designation would be possible, clarity on which organisations are formally part of and I presume that that would be some time Better Together. earlier than that, in 2013. From my point of view and that of Better Together, the sooner the As Craig Harrow pointed out, we are trying to designation, the better, because it will give ensure that the various organisations, which are certainty about status. politically autonomous, are not separate in terms of accounting. We do not want to get to the Blair Jenkins: I think that the Electoral regulated period and find that we cannot account Commission has its own processes to go through, for X thousand pounds that has been spent in our which we have to respect.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • House of Commons
    UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 140-xiii HOUSE OF COMMONS ORAL EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE SCOTTISH AFFAIRS COMMITTEE THE REFERENDUM ON SEPARATION FOR SCOTLAND WEDNESDAY 15 JANUARY 2014 PROFESSOR IAIN McLEAN, PROFESSOR ADAM TOMKINS and PROFESSOR KENNETH ARMSTRONG Evidence heard in Public Questions 4107 - 4258 USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT 1. This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others. 2. Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings. 3. Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant. 4. Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee. 1 Oral Evidence Taken before the Scottish Affairs Committee on Wednesday 15 January 2014 Members present: Mr Ian Davidson (Chair) Mike Crockart Graeme Morrice Pamela Nash Sir James Paice Mr Alan Reid Lindsay Roy ________________ Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Professor Iain McLean, Professor of Politics, Official Fellow, Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Professor Adam Tomkins, John Millar Chair of Public Law, University of Glasgow, and Professor Kenneth Armstrong, Professor of European Law, University of Cambridge, gave evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Revue Française De Civilisation Britannique, XX-2 | 2015 Bottom-Up Versus Top-Down Campaigning at the Scottish Independence Referendum
    Revue Française de Civilisation Britannique French Journal of British Studies XX-2 | 2015 Le référendum sur l’indépendance écossaise du 18 septembre 2014 Bottom-up versus Top-down Campaigning at the Scottish Independence Referendum 2014 La campagne du référendum écossais de 2014: la campagne officielle et la campagne de terrain Peter Lynch Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/rfcb/405 DOI: 10.4000/rfcb.405 ISSN: 2429-4373 Publisher CRECIB - Centre de recherche et d'études en civilisation britannique Electronic reference Peter Lynch, « Bottom-up versus Top-down Campaigning at the Scottish Independence Referendum 2014 », Revue Française de Civilisation Britannique [Online], XX-2 | 2015, Online since 23 July 2015, connection on 02 May 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/rfcb/405 ; DOI : 10.4000/rfcb.405 This text was automatically generated on 2 May 2019. Revue française de civilisation britannique est mis à disposition selon les termes de la licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International. Bottom-up versus Top-down Campaigning at the Scottish Independence Referendum... 1 Bottom-up versus Top-down Campaigning at the Scottish Independence Referendum 2014 La campagne du référendum écossais de 2014: la campagne officielle et la campagne de terrain Peter Lynch 1 The proposal to use the referendum device to achieve a mandate for Scottish independence had been the policy of the Scottish National Party since devolution was instituted in 1999. In office after 2007, the party had floated the idea of a two-step referendum on enhanced devolution and independence but its success at the 2011 Scottish election gave it the majority and the mandate required to press for a one- question referendum on independence.
    [Show full text]
  • Campaigning for the Female Vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum: Comparing Women for Independence and Women Together
    This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Edinburgh University Press in Scottish Affairs. The Version of Record is available online at: http://www.euppublishing.com/doi/abs/10.3366/scot.2018.0234. Campaigning for the Female Vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum: Comparing Women For Independence and Women Together Craig McAngus1 and Kirstein Rummery Abstract The 2014 Scottish independence referendum campaign saw a surge of campaigning activity from groups on both sides of the debate. The mainstream elements of the campaign were criticised for not bringing enough attention to women’s issues, and so Women For Independence (WFI) and Women Together (WT) were created in order to try and alleviate these concerns. This paper aims to compare the two organisations to ascertain whether or not they can be classified as part of wider social movements. Utilising data from the Scottish Political Archive at the University of Stirling, as well as face-to-face interviews and email conversations with activists from both groups, this paper explores the organisational structures and framing strategies of the two groups, as well as the opportunities and constraints they faced when it came to achieving their goals. Whilst WFI can be classified as a Social Movement Organisation operating within both the pro-independence and women’s movements, WT cannot be classified in this way and simply existed as a useful campaigning label during the independence referendum. WFI still continues to exist as a healthy, autonomous entitythat, should a second independence referendum be called, will be in a strong position to campaign for the female vote and overturn the persistent gender gap that exists in support for Scottish independence.
    [Show full text]
  • Referendum on the Independence of Scotland Laura Meynet
    Referendum on the Independence of Scotland Laura Meynet To cite this version: Laura Meynet. Referendum on the Independence of Scotland: the Campaign (2012-2014). Education. 2018. hal-02353499 HAL Id: hal-02353499 https://hal-univ-fcomte.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02353499 Submitted on 7 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License _____________________________________ Mémoire présenté pour l’obtention du Grade de MASTER « Métiers de l’Enseignement, de l’Education et de la Formation » Mention 2nd degré, Professeur des Lycées et Collèges, Anglais Referendum on the Independence of Scotland : the Campaign (2012- 2014) présenté par MEYNET Laura Sous la direction de : Monsieur LAPLACE Philippe (UFR SLHS) Année universitaire 2017-2018 Remerciements Je tiens à remercier sincèrement les personnes qui m’ont aidée dans l’écriture de ce mémoire, d’une manière ou d’une autre. Je souhaite remercier en premier lieu mon directeur de recherche, Monsieur Philippe Laplace, pour le temps qu’il m’a consacré, ses conseils, sa patience et sa bienveillance, ainsi que pour les nombreux ouvrages qu’il m’a généreusement confiés pendant la rédaction de ce mémoire.
    [Show full text]
  • Scottish Independence Referendum and the Deaf Community in Scotland
    Scottish Independence Referendum and the Deaf Community in Scotland Contents 1. Introduction 5 1.1. About British Deaf Association 6 1.2. About Empowering local Deaf Commnunities Project 7 1.3. Finding from the report on Impact of Welfare Reform on the 8 Deaf Community in Scotland 1.4. Scottish Independence Referendum 10 2. Scottish Independence Debate 12 2.1. BDA Scotland event 12 2.2. Question Time event 13 2.3. Key questions and concerns raised by the Deaf community in the event 16 2.4. Feedback from the Deaf community 18 3. Conclusion 19 3 4 1. Introduction The purpose of this consultation was to inform the Deaf community in Scotland about the Scottish Independence Referendum in their preferred language, which is British Sign Language (BSL). Representatives from the Yes Scotland and Better Together campaigns met members of the Deaf community to inform and discuss the upcoming referendum. BDA Scotland believes that the voices and opinions of Deaf people living in Scotland need to be heard in the debate about Scotland’s future; Deaf people should have equal access to all information and discussions about the Scottish Independence Referendum. 5 1.1. About the British Deaf Association The British Deaf Association (BDA) is the largest Deaf organisation in the UK that is run by Deaf people and united by shared experiences, history and, most importantly, by BSL. Our vision is “Deaf people fully participating and contributing as equal and valued citizens in the wider society”. Our Mission is to ensure a world in which the language, culture, community, diversity and heritage of Deaf people in the UK is respected and fully protected, ensuring that Deaf people can participate and contribute as equal and valued citizens in the wider society.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Smith
    BEYOND SMITH: Contributions to the continuing process of Scottish devolution Future of the UK and Scotland, Centre on Constitutional Change, University of Edinburgh Submissionsto the Smith Commission Future of the UK and Scotland Programme Contents Centre on Constitutional Change, University of Edinburgh The Smith Commission: An Introduction 3 The report of the Smith Commission serves to shift the focus in Scotland away from what Key Themes 6 powers the country wants or needs to how those powers might work and how they will be used. Tax and Welfare Devolution: How Did We Get Here? 10 The contributions contained in this ebook present opportunities to reflect on the pressures that created the commission and where Scotland’s devolutionary will go from here. Published Debates on additional devolution: What is happening elsewhere? 13 immediately before the report of the Smith Commission, this book is intended as a contribution So How Much More Devolution Does Scotland Want? 16 to the wider public discussion which, its authors believe, will and should follow the Lord Smith’s recommendations. The Case for Scottish Borrowing 20 The papers are based on submissions to the Smith Commission but have been largely updated to The Potential Economic Impacts of “DevoSmith” Powers* 23 consider what will come next in the ongoing process of Scottish devolution. The submissions have Maximal Devolution 26 been contributed by friends and fellows of the ESRC Centre on Constitutional Change. The centre is part of the Future of the UK and Scotland programme funded by the Economic and Social Research Devolution and Welfare 30 Council to contribute to policy and public debate around the Scottish referendum and its aftermath.
    [Show full text]
  • Scotland: an Example of Constitutionalism
    SCOTLAND: AN EXAMPLE OF CONSTITUTIONALISM Michael P. Clancy* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ............................................................................................. 101 II. Early Development .................................................................................. 101 III. Anglo-Norman Influences ....................................................................... 102 IV. The Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries ............................................... 103 V. The Eighteenth Century ........................................................................... 104 VI. The Scottish Enlightenment..................................................................... 105 VII. The Nineteenth and Early-Twentieth Centuries ...................................... 106 VIII. Resurgent Nationalism ............................................................................ 107 IX. Devolution ............................................................................................... 108 X. There Shall Be a Scottish Parliament ...................................................... 108 XI. The Proposals for the Referendum on Scottish Independence ................ 110 XII. The Referendum Campaign ..................................................................... 112 XIII. Post-Referendum Projects ....................................................................... 114 XIV. Issues Regarding the Further Devolution Proposals Since the Referendum ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Referendum on Scotland's Future Saturday 25Th January 2014
    The Referendum on Scotland’s Future Saturday 25th January 2014 Menzies Hotel, Glasgow “Women need to have their voices heard as part of the debate around Scotland’s future. They are the cornerstone of communities – both socially and economically. The campaigns need to engage with women and listen to their concerns and emerging issues. This event has ensured that those attending are able to raise and seek answers to the issues which are important to them.” Agnes Tolmie Chair, SWC www.scottishwomensconvention.org BACKGROUND TO THE EVENT On 18th September 2014, people across the country will take to the polls to vote on the question: “Should Scotland be an independent country?” Since the announcement of the referendum on Scotland’s future, the SWC has consulted with women from a range of diverse backgrounds and geographical locations to ascertain their views on this historic vote. Throughout 2012 the SWC held roadshows in Aberdeen, Anstruther, Dumfries, Glenrothes, Islay, Motherwell, Paisley, Peterhead and Stranraer. Discussions in these areas focussed on whether women felt they had enough information to make an informed decision and use their vote. Overall, there was seen to be a general lack of information regarding the 2014 referendum. More should have been made readily available for local people, i.e. having literature available from both campaigns at local community centres, schools, colleges, libraries etc. Having impartial information, without any party political bias, would also help women when it comes to making a decision regarding the referendum. During the 2013 roadshow programme, the SWC visited Kyle of Lochalsh, Breakish, Portree, Eyemouth, Haddington, Greenock and Livingston.
    [Show full text]
  • Online Allies and Tricky Freelancers: Understanding the Differences in the Role of Social Media in the Campaigns for the Scottish Independence Referendum
    Langer, A. I., Comerford, M. and McNulty, D. (2019) Online allies and tricky freelancers: understanding the differences in the role of social media in the campaigns for the Scottish Independence Referendum. Political Studies, (doi:10.1177/0032321718811252). This is the author’s final accepted version. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/171337/ Deposited on: 15 October 2018 Enlighten – Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow http://eprints.gla.ac.uk Political Studies Online allies and tricky freelancers: understanding the differences in the role of social media in the campaigns for the Scottish Independence Referendum Journal:For Political Peer Studies Review Manuscript ID POST-02-18-0068.R3 Manuscript Type: Article Keywords: electoral campaigns, social media, referenda, Scottish independence Using the 2014 Scottish independence referendum as a case study, this paper asks: firstly, to what extent is the use of digital communications technologies (DCTs), in particular social media, associated with fundamental changes to campaign organisations, specifically to the command and control model? Secondly, under what conditions are challenges to the model more likely to emerge? Using mixed methods, our analysis of the case demonstrates that radical organisational or strategic change is not inevitable, nor is there a one-size- Abstract: fits-all approach. Technologies are not ‘just tools’ that any campaign with enough resources will adopt in similar ways. Instead, depending on a number of interdependent factors (i.e. context, resources, strategy, organisational structure and culture), some campaigns—like Better Together—selectively adopt digital tools that fit with the command and control model; in other cases—like Yes Scotland—the application of DCTs and the dynamics created by linking to other (digital-enabled) grassroots organisations can have transformative effects.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scottish Independence Referendum and After
    THE SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM AND AFTER Michael Keating Professor of Politics at the University of Aberdeen, and director of the Centre on Constitutional Change SUMMARY: The Scottish Dilemma. – Constitutional Traditions in Scotland. – The Na- tionalists in Government. – The Battle Ground. – Economy and Finance. – Welfare. – Defence and Security. – Europe. – The Campaign. – The Outcome. – The Aftermath. – The Smith Report. – EVEL and Barnett. – The European Context. – The Future of the State. – Abstract – Resum – Resumen. The Scottish Dilemma The Scottish independence referendum on 18 September 2014 was a highly unusual event, an agreed popular vote on secession in an advanced industrial democracy. The result, with 45 per cent for in- dependence and 55 per cent against, might seem to have settled the question decisively. Yet, paradoxically, it is the losing side that has emerged in better shape and more optimistic, while the winners have been plunged into difficulties. In order to understand what has hap- pened, we need to examine the referendum in light of the evolution of the United Kingdom and the changing place of Scotland within it. Scotland should be seen as a case of the kind of spatial rescaling that is taking place more generally across Europe, as new forms of state- hood and of sovereignty evolve. Scottish public opinion favours more self-government but no longer recognizes the traditional nation-state model presented in the referendum question. Article received 12/12/2014; approved 12/12/2014. 73 REAF núm. 21, abril 2015, p. 73-98 Michael Keating Constitutional Traditions in Scotland Since the late nineteenth century union, there have been three main constitutional traditions in Scotland.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Fear – No Campaign’S Unbelievable Scares
    Project Fear – No campaign’s unbelievable scares Last month the Sunday Herald revealed that some inside the “Better Together” campaign actually refer to themselves as “Project Fear”. It has been easy to see why they use such a name. Better Together’s chief tactic – to do everything they can to scare Scots into voting No – contrasts starkly with the positive vision for the future of our country presented by Yes Scotland. Although the No campaign protest accusations of scaremongering, the sheer weight of their wholly negative rhetoric weighs increasingly heavy. And yet, their scare stories are often baseless or easily undermined. The UK Government’s latest paper in the “Scotland Analysis” series, like those before it, has been thoroughly discredited. Whether the No campaign’s scaremongering has been undermined by their own words, their own actions or by the demonstrable reality of the situation, the wholly negative nature of their campaigning is becoming increasingly transparent. And not least because some of the stories they tell today are virtually identical to those which were peddled in the past, and which were proved entirely wrong. SCOTLAND’S FUTURE IN SCOTLAND’S HANDS Undermined by their own words 1. “Scotland Could Be Forced To Join The Euro” It has long been a common argument of the No campaign to suggest that an independent Scotland could be made to enter the Eurozone if it wanted to be part of the EU. Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont has claimed that Scotland “could be forced to join the Euro”1 if we vote to become an independent state.
    [Show full text]
  • Referendum Groups Answer Pp7-9 ANNUAL FAMILY COVER ANNUAL FAMILY WORLDWIDE for JUST £94* TRAVEL INSURANCE for JUST £94*
    The Scottish Educational Journal May 2014 Vol. 98 www.eis.org.uk Issue no. 03 EIS raises education Road to questions - the campaign Referendum groups answer pp7-9 ANNUAL FAMILY COVER ANNUAL FAMILY WORLDWIDE FOR JUST £94* TRAVEL INSURANCE FOR JUST £94* l Comprehensive Worldwide Annual family policy l Natural disasters e.g. volcanic eruption, tsunami, hurricane, fire, flood, earthquake etc l full Winter sports Cover l increased protection when booking not made through a travel agent l Enhanced delay benefit l Enhanced missed departure cover * For members aged under 65. Premiums for members aged 65 to 69 years is £164 per year. ADD BOTH THEsE EssENTiAl COVERs fOR jusT £36 HOME EMERGENCY COVER MOTOR BREAKDOWN COVER fOR YOu & YOuR pARTNER l Main Heating system l plumbing & Drainage l Roadside Assistance and Recovery l Home security l Home Assist Download l Alternative Travel l Toilet unit application l Domestic power supply l Emergency Overnight Accommodation form here l lost Keys l lost Keys l Vermin infestation l Message service * Home Emergency and Motor Breakdown Cover are also available to existing EIS Travel Insurance customers. For an application or immediate cover call: 0845 230 1653 or visit www.philipwilliams.co.uk/eistravel Big Choices Ahead for Scotland In this edition of the SEJ, conditions of teachers, future pension arrangements, and how best to deliver Contents we look ahead to two an education system that meets the significant events that will needs of all learners across Scotland. 4. News have major implications The EIS Manifesto is being sent to all 6. Council News for Scottish education.
    [Show full text]